FOOTNOTE

This, might be a little on the late side, for a film I saw last thursday, but if I remember correctly there's a little extra credit for people writing up a few paragraphs on that film. If I am late, I guess this will just be an exercise in remembering.

For those of you who didn't see the movie, or don't know the premise. It essentially follows Eliezer & Uriel Shkolnik. Eliezar is the father and Uriel is the son, both of whom are Professors of Talmudic Studies: Philologists.  The father, is harsh, uncompromising, and tedious. His work is important but he remains unrecognized. The son is loose, agreeable, and studies things of interest more than importance. Unlike is father he is well recognized and respected by his peers.  The tension bases itself around the Israel award. After having been nominated for the last twenty years, and not having won, Eliezer is awarded the prize.  However, the award was given to the wrong Dr. Shkolnik. It was meant for the son.  From here the film continues to devolve, problems become increasingly apparent, the characters lose control of their lives and fall into self-perpetuated familial conflict which culminates, presumably, just after the movie ends.

So what does all this have to do with literary criticism. There is the obvious connection to Maimonides, who as a Talmudic scholar relates heavily to the profession of the Shkolniks. Like the father, Maimonides emphasizes careful, tedious study of scripture so as to accurately interpret and understand the double-truths of parables. He would problemitize the popularization that Uriel receives. The way he writes books to elucidate small matters of historical marriage to the masses. Such works are unduly accessible and allow for the undeserving to learn knowledge which they should not know. It also trivializes the greatness of the knowledge.  He would like agree with Eliezar's critique of the son, that instead of carefully analyzing the various shards of broken pottery to assess their origins and purposings, Uriel's scholarship is simply taking some shards and putting them back together only to call them an empty pot.  Similarly, Aristotle's emphasis on detail, would also side with Eliazer, who's scholarship remains undauntedly focused. All this being said, it's hard to deny the greater value or ease or happiness in Uriel's life, who has a happy wife, many friends, and relatively equivalent relationship with his son.
The question seems to remain: which is more valuable? Quality of study? Life? Fame?