Subject: Re: Hapworth
From: Cecilia Baader (cbaader@cubsmvp.com)
Date: Mon Apr 16 2001 - 02:31:36 GMT
Lucy-Ruth wrote:
> I have only read it once, but it made me deeply uncomfortable. I
> couldn't decide how convincing I found it as the work of a seven year
> old genius, or how to view the sexual comments he makes, partivcularly
> in light of his marriage with Muriel.
I think that it's the first "normal" picture that we have of Seymour, one that isn't tinted by Buddy-colored glasses. It's the juxtaposition of the picture of Seymour the Saint versus Seymour the Human Being that gets people, I think, and they get angry that he isn't the saint that Buddy always made him out to be.
Think about how Seymour heaved the stone at Charlotte. Buddy never quite understood why he did it. I think that Hapworth is a similar rock to the skull for us, the reader. We're so accustomed to adoring Seymour that we need this cosh in the head to understand that he was supposed to be flawed, that Buddy is as much a part of this story as his brother.
I like Hapworth. I think that it's the sort of liking that comes with time, but I think that in Hapworth is almost everything. You just have too look. It's the least mined story in the Salinger canon, but I think it has some of the richest information if you're willing to blast through it.
Regards,
Cecilia.
Common Sense. http://www.geocities.com/c_baader
_________________________________________
Sign up for your cubsmvp.com email today!
http://www.cubs.com
-
* Unsubscribing? Mail majordomo@roughdraft.org with the message
* UNSUBSCRIBE BANANAFISH
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b25 : Thu May 17 2001 - 17:47:53 GMT