RE: teddy, at ten, is seymour at thirty.

Jim, no one is drawing any lines here, I am just saying that part of the
creation of fiction if it is worth its salt should provoke creation, the
imagination should be lit, yes nonfiction can too and that is what is best
in life. Why did Jerome change the name to Glass if that is what he did or
did he start out writing a whole new thing but the same old ghost things
never left so they continue to haunt all his habitations. I would gamble
that Jerome had Ghosts to lay to rest and they came quite naturally to
inhabit his latest world. The tourist who runs across a spectacular sight
to behold often takes more than one picture, go to the grand canyon and snap
one from the rim and ride down and snap one from the bottom, same place.
Catcher was told through Holden's eyes and Seymour Glass was pictured
through Buddies. If I had wrote Catcher and wanted to move away from
internal wrestling with the world to an external one I would have done
things different but the old shut-in showed it to us from the outside in,
and that takes a window with clear glass. We were in Holden but like his
picture taking details writing technique he wanted us to stay in ourselves
and see the Glasses from the outside, they become the other which is very
enticing. Come out and play.
Daniel

I wouldn't even draw the line at fiction writing -- different methods
produce different results no matter what the form, all of which can be
valuable for different purposes. That's part of what Michael was saying
about a historical or chronological approach -- it was too limiting. By
itself, perhaps, but in addition to others, it helps.

Jim
-
* Unsubscribing? Mail majordomo@roughdraft.org with the message
* UNSUBSCRIBE BANANAFISH
Received on Wed Aug 27 15:55:31 2003