In the beginning I really enjoyed reading it, since Jabotinsky was a wonderful writer. However, since I simultaneously read "Zionism and Fin-de-siècle: Cosmopolitanism and Nationalism from Nordau to Jabotinsky" by Michael Stanislawski, my enjoyment was pretty much destroyed by realizing that hardly anything is true in Jabotinsky's autobiography. I know that this genre is never about documentation, but still most autobiography authors use much less deliberate distortions. Then in the middle Jabotinsky himself notes "it seems strange to me how I could have confused (when I spoke about the anti-Semitic speech that constituted my first step in Zionism, in Bern, 1898) Nachman Syrkin with Nahum Sirkin [...] I will commit errors such as these, probably as numerous and even worse, in this second part." This part really upset me, so I continued with even less enthusiasm than what Stanislawski left for me.
In the beginning I really enjoyed reading it, since Jabotinsky was a wonderful writer. However, since I simultaneously read "Zionism and Fin-de-siècle: Cosmopolitanism and Nationalism from Nordau to Jabotinsky" by Michael Stanislawski, my enjoyment was pretty much destroyed by realizing that hardly anything is true in Jabotinsky's autobiography. I know that this genre is never about documentation, but still most autobiography authors use much less deliberate distortions. Then in the middle Jabotinsky himself notes "it seems strange to me how I could have confused (when I spoke about the anti-Semitic speech that constituted my first step in Zionism, in Bern, 1898) Nachman Syrkin with Nahum Sirkin [...] I will commit errors such as these, probably as numerous and even worse, in this second part." This part really upset me, so I continued with even less enthusiasm than what Stanislawski left for me.
Megjegyzések
Megjegyzés küldése