D. M. Thomas | Criticism

This literature criticism consists of approximately 3 pages of analysis & critique of D. M. Thomas.

D. M. Thomas | Criticism

This literature criticism consists of approximately 3 pages of analysis & critique of D. M. Thomas.
This section contains 825 words
(approx. 3 pages at 300 words per page)
Buy the Critical Review by Boyd Tonkin

SOURCE: “Russian Salad,” in New Statesman, June 6, 1986, pp. 26-27.

In the following review, Tonkin offers unfavorable assessment of Sphinx.

A sequel to Ararat and Swallow, the third part of D. M. Thomas's planned quartet of Russian novels begins with an unlikely fantasy. In a Soviet mental hospital a tortured dissident claims to the guard that he works for the New Statesman. The orderly has other ideas and a cosh to support them: ‘You're Kravchenko, a fucking terrorist, and a raving loonie. Learn some fucking respect.’

Ever since The White Hotel, Thomas has given his public Kravchenko's strange delusion in reverse: he thrills a safe Western intelligentsia with visions of persecution and massacre. What Sphinx in a defensive moment of self-description calls ‘The author's lurid style / And themes of holocaust and lust’ seem to cater to the liberal's ‘hunger for absolutes’. To a doubtful culture he spins a dream...

(read more)

This section contains 825 words
(approx. 3 pages at 300 words per page)
Buy the Critical Review by Boyd Tonkin
Copyrights
Gale
Critical Review by Boyd Tonkin from Gale. ©2005-2006 Thomson Gale, a part of the Thomson Corporation. All rights reserved.