Re: Seymour,Sybil,Muriel
Brendan McKennedy (the.tourist@mailexcite.com)
Sat, 20 Dec 1997 21:19:20 -0700
Mattis wrote:
>This, as I am sure it was your intention
to convey, is the exact opposite
>of what I wanted to say, that children with
their faults are "nice".
>While I can agree that an obsession with
innocence can be faulted, I would
>not have to say it was because the (what you
would call the "so-called")
>innocence is at fault.
This raises a very important question when it
comes to Salinger, and that is the definition
of "innocent."
Here there seem to be two different
interpretations of the word, one of which seems
to be Untainted By the Evils of the World,
a la Allie. The other seems to be Without
Intentional Endangerment to the Well-Being
of Others.
Unfortunately, I was considering the latter
without the former, and while Mattis may not
have, it seems very common to consider the
former without the latter.
I think that, when considering the "Innocence"
of Salinger's characters, particularly his
very young characters, the two definitions must coexist. One may or may not precede
the other,
or both may be ubiquitous, especially when
considering the question of inter-life karma,
but it's important to consider them still.
Just a thought that I had hoped would lead
somewhere. It may not have, but I'd be
interested in what you all think anyway.
If you got this far, thanks for humoring me.
Brendan
Free web-based email, Forever, From anywhere!
http://www.mailexcite.com