Interesting. I have not seen the film, so will need to check it out. I think an active role in life is always the best, although it is all too easy to slip into passivity. Let life happen to you.
The loss of a sense of autonomy is a kind of death, so the strength of Ivan and the real people he was probably based upon is impressive. A life saver in such an environment. It is tempting to wonder how any of us would fare in a gulag ourselves. We all like to think we'd be the tough ones. But the deep sense of despair would be difficult to survive.
I’ve often considered exactly how well I might do in such a situation. I strongly suspect that there’s a large gap between how I’d like to think of myself responding and how it would actually go.
This was very interesting, thank you. I have not read the book or seen the movie but now I want to. Much to think about in regard to “Why me” situations.
I’m just gonna disagree with Eric. Larry had every opportunity to respond to his circumstances. Love his wife, keep her from straying, and the kids? Really? I had to live with that indifference myself. That’s how kids are. But sometimes you have to fight for that. So whilst ivan made the best possible of an impossible situation, Larry made the worst of a good situation. Interesting read!
What I was trying to get at was more that Larry thinks of the problems in his life as external forces over which he has no control, when in fact he does have at least some degree of control. Then the phone rings. Now we see what a truly unavoidable problem looks like and it puts our own agency into perspective. I think Erik and I are getting at the same thing but maybe in a different light.
Either way, thanks for reading and providing your take on the story!
The film is definitely trying to draw that connection, though with several important differences. Now that you mention it, a rereading of Job may be in order. Having just watched the film I may see it in a different light. Thanks for reading!
I think this is a fundamental misread of Larry Gopnik and essentially the precise opposite of what "A Serious Man" is about, but I do appreciate the interesting comparison between the two characters.
I'm curious, have you read Varlam Shalamov's "Kolyma Stories"? That'd be right up your alley, I suspect, and an interesting point of further comparison between these two works.
I don't find Larry to be as passive in his own life, personally, but I absolutely see your view of him as interesting and valid. I think Larry is simply a rationalist being confronted by the cruel indifference of the universe and struggling to find relief where there isn't any. Even if he'd seen the signs of his marriage cracking or been more forceful in dealing with Clive or stood more firmly against his kids being rebellious teens in their own interesting ways, a terminal illness or a tornado lies in wait to lay waste to any of his best laid plans or intentions. I really love the story the rabbi tells about the teeth, probably because it reflects my own view of life in a fun way. Letting go is a secret superpower.
I think the other important thing is that there is a distinction between where the two characters are in their respective arcs. Ivan has reached the point in his journey where he can accept his conditions and respond to them in the best manner he can. His ability to go so far in his magnanimity as to give Alyosha one of the cookies is really moving. But that seems to me to be because of where Ivan is in his life. He's already gone through the whirlwind of fate and it landed him in the gulag, whereupon it was up to him how to comport himself.
Larry is in the middle of his whirlwind, quite literally at the film's end. He hasn't landed and been given an opportunity to respond to his circumstances. If the doctor's diagnosis or tornado don't get him, perhaps he finds himself in a new situation and responds with the same verve Ivan does. Conversely, i have a hard time imagining that on the "One Day" when Ivan was ripped from his home and sent to a gulag he didn't cry out "why me?!" at least once. He would be utterly inhuman if he didn't, as far as I'm concerned.
I'll be very interested to hear your take on "Kolyma". It's almost a refutation of Solzhenitsyn, in my read. Needless to say, in Shalamov's experience, Alyosha does not receive any cookies!
Denisovitch rocked Russia when Khrushchev allowed its publication to go forward. Interesting that in the final edit Sohlzenitzen removed the saved crust of bread that Ivan took to bed with him.
I once had the opportunity to speak with David Byrne for a few moments (at an art event) and asked him 1) if he'd seen "A Serious Man" (yes) and 2) if he thought, as I do, that it's in homage to Talking Heads that the movie and their song "Once in a Lifetime" both end the same way: after an existential reëxamination of suburban life, "A twister's coming/Here comes the twister."
(He politely appreciated the concept but denied that he'd had any awareness of the connection.)
Asking the Coens the same question is definitely on my bucket list.
Good essay and interesting comments. Per Simon Tanner's comment: I happen to have read Job a few weeks ago and I watched A Serious Man when it came out. Job has three friends who come to him in his troubles and go through a cycle of 3 speeches each, commiserating with him, blaming him, forgiving him, explaining God. After their speeches a fourth speaker, Elihu, holds forth that their words are themselves sinful and their attempts to divine God's purpose vain and presumptuous. Then God speaks to Job (Ch 38-41): Where were you when I founded the earth? (38:4). In the end Job repents his questioning, and God gives him everything back, and doubles it.
So is Larry Gopnik Job? Dunno. But maybe Gopnik is not guilty of doing nothing, as you say (but not forgetting that he took the bribe) but of accusing God of being unjust. As to Ivan Denisovich - I read that back in the 1980s, but I don't remember Ivan cursing God (but I read it a long time ago). So, yeah, you should read Job again.
Anyway, Mr. Man, thanks for a great read. Thought lives, eh?
Also, I just re-watched A Serious Man and here's the message of the film, from the first frame: "Receive with simplicity everything that happens to you. - Rashi"
“One can choose to go back toward safety or forward toward growth. Growth must be chosen again and again; fear must be overcome again and again.” Words from the great Abraham Maslow. If we aren't pushing for something better, we're bound to settle for something worse. Great read. Thanks for your work
Interesting. I have not seen the film, so will need to check it out. I think an active role in life is always the best, although it is all too easy to slip into passivity. Let life happen to you.
The loss of a sense of autonomy is a kind of death, so the strength of Ivan and the real people he was probably based upon is impressive. A life saver in such an environment. It is tempting to wonder how any of us would fare in a gulag ourselves. We all like to think we'd be the tough ones. But the deep sense of despair would be difficult to survive.
I’ve often considered exactly how well I might do in such a situation. I strongly suspect that there’s a large gap between how I’d like to think of myself responding and how it would actually go.
If you read Viktor Frankl he tells you it is about hope. You need something to live for.
This was very interesting, thank you. I have not read the book or seen the movie but now I want to. Much to think about in regard to “Why me” situations.
Thanks for reading, Jenn. I definitely recommend both!
I’m just gonna disagree with Eric. Larry had every opportunity to respond to his circumstances. Love his wife, keep her from straying, and the kids? Really? I had to live with that indifference myself. That’s how kids are. But sometimes you have to fight for that. So whilst ivan made the best possible of an impossible situation, Larry made the worst of a good situation. Interesting read!
What I was trying to get at was more that Larry thinks of the problems in his life as external forces over which he has no control, when in fact he does have at least some degree of control. Then the phone rings. Now we see what a truly unavoidable problem looks like and it puts our own agency into perspective. I think Erik and I are getting at the same thing but maybe in a different light.
Either way, thanks for reading and providing your take on the story!
I loved both! Excellent analysis! I’ve heard some people say that Larry and his story were a modern retelling of the Book of Job.
The film is definitely trying to draw that connection, though with several important differences. Now that you mention it, a rereading of Job may be in order. Having just watched the film I may see it in a different light. Thanks for reading!
I think this is a fundamental misread of Larry Gopnik and essentially the precise opposite of what "A Serious Man" is about, but I do appreciate the interesting comparison between the two characters.
I'm curious, have you read Varlam Shalamov's "Kolyma Stories"? That'd be right up your alley, I suspect, and an interesting point of further comparison between these two works.
I’ve had Kolyma Stories on my list for some time, I will definitely be reading it in the near future.
If you have the time, I’m Interested to hear your thoughts on A Serious Man. Thanks for reading.
I don't find Larry to be as passive in his own life, personally, but I absolutely see your view of him as interesting and valid. I think Larry is simply a rationalist being confronted by the cruel indifference of the universe and struggling to find relief where there isn't any. Even if he'd seen the signs of his marriage cracking or been more forceful in dealing with Clive or stood more firmly against his kids being rebellious teens in their own interesting ways, a terminal illness or a tornado lies in wait to lay waste to any of his best laid plans or intentions. I really love the story the rabbi tells about the teeth, probably because it reflects my own view of life in a fun way. Letting go is a secret superpower.
I think the other important thing is that there is a distinction between where the two characters are in their respective arcs. Ivan has reached the point in his journey where he can accept his conditions and respond to them in the best manner he can. His ability to go so far in his magnanimity as to give Alyosha one of the cookies is really moving. But that seems to me to be because of where Ivan is in his life. He's already gone through the whirlwind of fate and it landed him in the gulag, whereupon it was up to him how to comport himself.
Larry is in the middle of his whirlwind, quite literally at the film's end. He hasn't landed and been given an opportunity to respond to his circumstances. If the doctor's diagnosis or tornado don't get him, perhaps he finds himself in a new situation and responds with the same verve Ivan does. Conversely, i have a hard time imagining that on the "One Day" when Ivan was ripped from his home and sent to a gulag he didn't cry out "why me?!" at least once. He would be utterly inhuman if he didn't, as far as I'm concerned.
I'll be very interested to hear your take on "Kolyma". It's almost a refutation of Solzhenitsyn, in my read. Needless to say, in Shalamov's experience, Alyosha does not receive any cookies!
Thanks for writing!
Denisovitch rocked Russia when Khrushchev allowed its publication to go forward. Interesting that in the final edit Sohlzenitzen removed the saved crust of bread that Ivan took to bed with him.
Great writing and succinct analysis. Thanks.
I once had the opportunity to speak with David Byrne for a few moments (at an art event) and asked him 1) if he'd seen "A Serious Man" (yes) and 2) if he thought, as I do, that it's in homage to Talking Heads that the movie and their song "Once in a Lifetime" both end the same way: after an existential reëxamination of suburban life, "A twister's coming/Here comes the twister."
(He politely appreciated the concept but denied that he'd had any awareness of the connection.)
Asking the Coens the same question is definitely on my bucket list.
Good essay and interesting comments. Per Simon Tanner's comment: I happen to have read Job a few weeks ago and I watched A Serious Man when it came out. Job has three friends who come to him in his troubles and go through a cycle of 3 speeches each, commiserating with him, blaming him, forgiving him, explaining God. After their speeches a fourth speaker, Elihu, holds forth that their words are themselves sinful and their attempts to divine God's purpose vain and presumptuous. Then God speaks to Job (Ch 38-41): Where were you when I founded the earth? (38:4). In the end Job repents his questioning, and God gives him everything back, and doubles it.
So is Larry Gopnik Job? Dunno. But maybe Gopnik is not guilty of doing nothing, as you say (but not forgetting that he took the bribe) but of accusing God of being unjust. As to Ivan Denisovich - I read that back in the 1980s, but I don't remember Ivan cursing God (but I read it a long time ago). So, yeah, you should read Job again.
Anyway, Mr. Man, thanks for a great read. Thought lives, eh?
Also, I just re-watched A Serious Man and here's the message of the film, from the first frame: "Receive with simplicity everything that happens to you. - Rashi"
“One can choose to go back toward safety or forward toward growth. Growth must be chosen again and again; fear must be overcome again and again.” Words from the great Abraham Maslow. If we aren't pushing for something better, we're bound to settle for something worse. Great read. Thanks for your work