Seymour,Sybil,Muriel

Mattis Fishman (mattis@argos.argoscomp.com)
Wed, 17 Dec 1997 13:49:14 -0500 (EST) 

Hello everyone,

The recent discussions of Seymour and Muriel have got me thinking about
the story again (do I ever stop thinking about it?). So I hope you will
pardon me if I indulge in some Reader Response Therapy(tm) for a while.
That is, sometimes I see something there that I'm not bold enough to
assert was intended by the author, yet life imitates (is there such
a thing as a Freudian keyboard slip? I originally typed "initiates")
art and then looks for affirmation, even if it means peeling off the
paint to look for obscured images or playing the record backwards to find
out who is really alive or dead.

I am struck by the image of Seymour on the beach with Sybil (again, I
just typed Muriel) the abrupt end of that scene, and immediate return to
Muriel. What did Seymour see, what did he take back?

It has been suggested before that Seymour saw the corruption of innocence,
and saw Sybil as jealous, dog-teasing, untruthful. The weight of this
inevitable spoiling of perfection drove him to give up on this world.

I would like to suggest that instead of seeing lovely Sybil's faults as
corruptions of her innocence, they are merely imperfections. These
attitudes and behaviors, instead as beeing seen as something acquired and
false, are also part of her youthful innocence. When we meet Muriel,
we see her engaging in self-indulgence, superficiality and almost cannot
help being drawn to self-righteous censure. Yet in Sybil, we see similar
faults and fall in love. Her flaws only enhace the work of art, like the
grain in the woodwork - how much more poignant her anxiety at getting
soaked, this terrifier of small dogs. Her desire to have Sharon Lipshutz
pushed off the piano seat, comes from the same innocent soul that can
see bananafish. Where do these flaws come from? I don't know, but they
are there and cannot be anything other than innocent in a laughing
young lady who can say "this is a *yellow*". Surely when she runs away
without regret, it is because innocence is incapable of regret, and has
nothing to regret.

I would like to think that Seymour came to this realization, and carried
it to the next step - that Muriel is essentially innocent, that she will
paint her nails, ignore the telephone and worry about clothes because she
is flawed and lovable, and has merely outgrown dolls and kittens. How can
he not love her, she is genuine, however imperfect.

Does this explain the story? Hey, I called it reader response, implying
it is more personal than professional. I could say that Seymour, having
this insight into non-judgmental love went upstairs to make love to Muriel,
not to kill himself. It was only after he realized that he could never
actually live up to his own ideal, that he reacted to his own reaction
to the foot-starer, when he took out the gun. I think, though, that this
is too much of a reach.

I do wish that I could learn this lesson myself, that is perhaps have it
tatooed inside my eyelids, or written however cryptically on my back at
whatever cost.

All the best,
Mattis