AMOSOZ
361
Goodheart:
I read your work in tra nsla tion so that I can onl y sense the
power of the H ebrew , which is eloquent through the transla tion . I
would think that one particul a r problem of a H ebrew writer is that
he is writin g in a la nguage tha t is a t once very old a nd ve ry new.
You have the anxiety of influence and then you have the se nse of
infinite poss ibilities . C an you give me some sense of wha t happens
when you write?
Oz:
Modern H ebrew is a wonderful la nguage fo r poe try, ex tremely
dif-llcult fo r prose, and a lmo
l
impo sible for drama . It's a strange
combina ti on: half of it is solid rock, biblical, postbibli cal, mi sla id
medi eva l H ebrew, pa rt of it moving, se nsuous, coll oqui al, which
is changin g ve ry quickl y, with eve ry new wave of immigra ti on. I
guess I could tell you tha t, in some ways, modern H ebrew is
somewha t like Eli zabetha n English. Our language i not ye t petri–
fi ed a nd solidified , a nd one i till in a pos ition to legisla te within
the la nguage . I'm not sugges tin g tha t each one of us is a Willi am
Shakespeare, but th a t tempta ti on is there. Yes, you can take liber–
ti es with Mod ern H ebrew. By compa ri son , the onl y European
language whi ch I know to a ce rta in degree - English - is reall y no t
at a ll such a lady of easy virtue. Unless you ha ppen to be a mad
Irishma n a nd take a ll the liberti es in the world with English . But
Hebrew rei:dl y encourages such prac tices, you can still form the
language .
Goodheart:
Is a n academi c impul e deve loping? I mean , a re there aca–
demi cs who a re say ing: we're go in g too fa r , thi s is eccentric?
Oz:
Of course, of course, of course . The puritans a nd the conse rva–
ti ves, the revolutiona ri es wi thin the langu age, a ll of those a re a t
work , and the struggle ove r the cha rac ter and ove r the degree of
permi ss ive ness in H ebrew is vehement.
Goodheart:
obod y ha ye t propo 'ed es ta blishing an Academy?
Oz:
There i an Academy, the Academy for the H ebrew La nguage. It
has bee n a round for decades, but to a ce rta in ex tent it is in"ele–
vant. It can't reall y form the la nguage. La nguage is created and
rec rea ted a ll the time by immi grants, by people who lea rn it the
ha rd way a nd enrich it , reall y by fo reign syntaxes, fo re ign tradi –
ti ons, fo reign structures. Biblical H ebrew , for exampl e, neve r had
a prese nt tense .
Goodheart:
Neve r had a present tense?
Oz:
ever, every thing was either pas t or future, which perh aps is
phil osophicall y ri ght ... makes perfec t se nse. Modern H ebrew
has a prese nt tense, but it is still a ve ry weak tense, a nd thi s dee p
d if-le rence of the system of tenses implies a diHe rent p rocess of
time, consequentl y, perha ps a differe nt se nse of reali ty.
