 Writing in the American literary magazine Salmagundi , Alvin H. Rosenfeld called The Portage a " breakthrough work " that " astonishes " . He was struck by the book 's interplay between the landscape of swamp and jungle , and the " landscape of speech " — the former being " brilliantly registered " with its " immense feeling of physicality " , and the latter , " even more dramatic " in the way it exposes " the dark underside of words " and how its use and misuse reveals the true nature of a person . He was particularly impressed by the depiction of Nazi hunter Emmanuel Lieber and his role as representative of the Jewish consciousness . Rosenfeld noted that while Holocaust literature often either soars to " expostulation and apostrophe " , or sinks to " a dwindling sob of elegiac lament " , Steiner 's Lieber " mediates between these two extremes , ... simultaneously records and mourns , coldly enumerates yet carries an immense affect " . What did concern the reviewer , however , was the way Steiner used ideas from his earlier works , that he had put them " virtually verbatim " into Hitler 's mouth , creating the impression that " Steiner 's understanding of Hitler were identical with the latter 's self @-@ understanding " . Rosenfeld also questioned why the book had to end with Hitler 's speech . He said that Steiner 's fictive Hitler plays " the devil 's game of language subversion " , making " madness [ sound ] like music " , something the real Hitler had perfected . By stopping at this point , Rosenfeld felt that Steiner " succumb [ s ] , rhetorically , to the seductive eloquence of negation " , which undermines his own " high standards of moral intelligence " . But overall Rosenfeld said The Portage " must be counted among the most vigorous attempts to portray the presence and meaning of Hitler " , forcing us to confront him " in a way hardly seen before in fiction " . 
 Writing in the American literary magazine Salmagundi , Alvin H. Rosenfeld called The Portage a " breakthrough work " <a href='null_relcl' title='1'><mark>that</mark></a>" astonishes " . He was struck by the book <a href='null_genetive' title='2'><mark>'s</mark></a>interplay between the landscape of swamp and jungle , and the " landscape of speech " — the former being " brilliantly registered " with its " immense feeling of physicality " , and the latter , " even more dramatic " in the way it <a href='uninflect' title='3'><mark>exposes</mark></a> " the dark underside of words " and how its use and misuse <a href='uninflect' title='4'><mark>reveals</mark></a> the true nature of a person . He was particularly impressed by the depiction of Nazi hunter Emmanuel Lieber and his role as representative of the Jewish consciousness . Rosenfeld noted that while Holocaust literature often either <a href='uninflect' title='5'><mark>soars</mark></a> to " expostulation and apostrophe " , or <a href='uninflect' title='6'><mark>sinks</mark></a> to " a dwindling sob of elegiac lament " , Steiner <a href='null_genetive' title='7'><mark>'s</mark></a>Lieber " <a href='uninflect' title='8'><mark>mediates</mark></a> between these two extremes , ... simultaneously records and mourns , coldly <a href='uninflect' title='9'><mark>enumerates</mark></a> yet <a href='uninflect' title='10'><mark>carries</mark></a> an immense affect " . What did concern the reviewer , however , was the way Steiner used ideas from his earlier works , that he <a href='been_done' title='11'><mark>had</mark></a> put them " virtually verbatim " into Hitler <a href='null_genetive' title='12'><mark>'s</mark></a>mouth , creating the impression that " Steiner <a href='null_genetive' title='13'><mark>'s</mark></a>understanding of Hitler <a href='uninflect' title='14'><mark>were</mark></a> identical with the latter <a href='null_genetive' title='15'><mark>'s</mark></a>self @-@ understanding " . Rosenfeld also questioned why the book had to end with Hitler <a href='null_genetive' title='16'><mark>'s</mark></a>speech . He said that Steiner <a href='null_genetive' title='17'><mark>'s</mark></a>fictive Hitler <a href='uninflect' title='18'><mark>plays</mark></a> " the devil <a href='null_genetive' title='19'><mark>'s</mark></a>game of language subversion " , making " madness [ sound ] like music " , something the real Hitler <a href='been_done' title='20'><mark>had</mark></a> perfected . By stopping at this point , Rosenfeld felt that Steiner " succumb [ s ] , rhetorically , to the seductive eloquence of negation " , which <a href='uninflect' title='21'><mark>undermines</mark></a> his own " high standards of moral intelligence " . But overall Rosenfeld said The Portage " must be counted among the most vigorous attempts to portray the presence and meaning of Hitler " , forcing us to confront him " in a way hardly seen before in fiction " . 
Writing in the American literary magazine Salmagundi , Alvin H. Rosenfeld called da Portage a " breakthrough wrk " " astonishes " . He was struck by the book  interplay between the landscape of swamp and jungle , and the " landscape of speech " — the former bein " brilliantly registered " with its " immense feeling of physicality " , and the latter , " even more dramatic " in tdaway it expose " the dark underside of words " and how its use and misuse reveal thdarue nature of a person . He was particularly impressed by the depiction of Nazi hunter Emmanuel Lieber and his role as representative of the Jewish consciousness . Rosenfeld noted that while Holocaust literature often either soar to " expostulation and apostrophe " , or sink to " a dwindling sob of elegiac lament " , Steiner  Lieber " mediate between these 2 extremes , ... simultaneously records and mourns , coldly enumerate yet carry an immense affect " . What did concern thedaviewer , however , was the way Steiner used ideas from his earlier works , that he done put em " virtually verbatim " into Hitler  mouth , creating the impression that " Steiner  understanding of Hitler was identical w/ the latter  self @-@ understanding " . Rosenfeld also questioned y the book had to end with Hitler  speech . He said dat Steiner  fictive Hitler play " the devil  game of language subversion " , makin " madness [ sound ] like music " , somethin the real Hitler done perfected . By stopping at this point , Rosenfeld felt that Steiner " succumb [ s ] , rhetorically , to the dauctive eloquence of negation " , which undermine his own " high standards of moral intelligence " . But overall Rosenfeld said The Pdaage " must be counted among the modavigorous attempts to portray the predace and meaning of Hitler " , forcing us to confront em " in a way hardly seen before in fiction " .