Re: Seymour an Introduction

it's ironic that salinger stopped publishing because,
it's been reported, the critics got to him. sort of a
spin-off of the reputed keatsian situation.

i agree with scottie: a biography any old day rather
than literary criticism. yet as jim says in another
post, there's valuable criticism out there too. but
sometimes it's very hard to find given the reason the
criticism got written in the first place. i'd say pulp
90% of it; scottie nails it in his final sentence
below.

kim

--- Scottie Bowman <rbowman@indigo.ie> wrote:
>
> '... I've never read a piece of [...]criticism
> [...] that
> made [...] fiction less than what it is for me
> ...'
>
> I would have change that 'made' into 'didn't
> make'.
>
> Perversely, I think I might write 'biography'
> instead of
> 'criticism' if I were trying to find a source of
> enrichment.
> How unfashionable is it possible to reveal
> oneself?
>
> But old Keats was speaking in his rough,
> inarticulate
> way for multitudes when he complained about
> people
> who - what was it? - wanted to unpick the
> rainbow.
> (I'm sure I can depend on the scholars to
> provide
> the exact quote.)
>
> 'Ain't nuttin' but the text,' intones Matt in
> that strange
> Tibetan chant of his. No, nuttin' but page
> after page
> after page of speculative, modish, jargonesque
> guff.
>
> Scottie B.
>
> -
> * Unsubscribing? Mail majordomo@roughdraft.org with
> the message
> * UNSUBSCRIBE BANANAFISH

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
HotJobs - Search Thousands of New Jobs
http://www.hotjobs.com
-
* Unsubscribing? Mail majordomo@roughdraft.org with the message
* UNSUBSCRIBE BANANAFISH
Received on Fri Aug 9 12:51:30 2002