who "knows" when he wrote teddy. or bananafish. isn't all that's "known" is
when the stories were published? do you know because you looked? at what?
i'll go look. i'm not saying he wrote teddy before bananafish or anything
like that. i'm just saying that sometimes something is achieved by arguing
outside "the box." relying on only what's known are the last words of the
person who's afraid of being wrong at all costs.
>>> jrovira@drew.edu 08/27/03 08:27AM >>>
Yeah, yeah, you're right, the application of any specific method must be
rigid and no one knows the facts.
These are the last words of the person who hasn't tried looking....
Like I said, both approaches have their merits. I agree that Salinger
"always knew what he wanted to write about," but how he wrote about it
changed over time, and even some of the things he said. It doesn't hurt
to pay attention to simple facts like publication dates vs. themes
introduced.
His stories weren't originally released all at once in little white
books, you know.
Jim
ANELLO Michael J wrote:
>just because i like fart and poop jokes. dan, you were right, they caught
>wind of me!
>
>
>i think salinger always knew what he wanted to write about. so what if he
>hadn't read any vedanta before teddy.
>
>does rigorous have linguistic ties to "rigid." ?
>
>i's jes wundren. facts are facts, of course. but, who really knows the
>facts. salinger's biographers? the people who wrote the bible? or
salinger.
> and god.
>
>(dangit, dale!)
>
>
-
* Unsubscribing? Mail majordomo@roughdraft.org with the message
* UNSUBSCRIBE BANANAFISH
-
* Unsubscribing? Mail majordomo@roughdraft.org with the message
* UNSUBSCRIBE BANANAFISH
Received on Wed Aug 27 11:38:10 2003
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Thu Oct 16 2003 - 00:28:17 EDT