Re: 2 Q's

Subject: Re: 2 Q's
From: Mattis Fishman (mattis@argoscomp.com)
Date: Wed Feb 23 2000 - 14:17:17 EST

• sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
• Next message: Ed Fenning: "Who's changing in the phone booth?"
• Previous message: Tim O'Connor: "Re: New Yorker Rejections: addendum"
• Maybe in reply to: William Hochman: "2 Q's"
• Next in thread: Benjamin Samuels: "Re: 2 Q's"
• Maybe reply: Mattis Fishman: "Re: 2 Q's"

   Madhava, and all,

   Thank you for clarifying some of your remarks.

   I have to admit that when I read "God is to Salinger as
   Seymour is to Buddy" it struck me as though you had written
   God is *for* Salinger, and that you meant that he is obsessed
   in the same manner as Buddy is about his so-near-and-yet-so-far
   relationship - to the point that I would have branded JDS, or
   anyone with this problem as messianic (which is probably not
   the right name for this behavior, but you pick the right word).
   Furthermore, I did not see where one could derive this much
   about the author from the text, making the assertion simply speculation.

   If it appeared that I referred to you, Madhava, when I mentioned
   any particular mental instability, I sincerely apologize.

   As I read you now, it appears that you meant that *we* might
   view Salinger's willingness to share his idea of God in the same
   way Buddy struggles to give Seymour away as his Davega bicycle.

   It still seems like speculation, though.

   Thanks again,
   Mattis
-
* Unsubscribing? Mail majordomo@roughdraft.org with the message
* UNSUBSCRIBE BANANAFISH

• Next message: Ed Fenning: "Who's changing in the phone booth?"
• Previous message: Tim O'Connor: "Re: New Yorker Rejections: addendum"
• Maybe in reply to: William Hochman: "2 Q's"
• Next in thread: Benjamin Samuels: "Re: 2 Q's"
• Maybe reply: Mattis Fishman: "Re: 2 Q's"

This archive was generated by hypermail 2b25 : Thu Mar 02 2000 - 19:30:21 EST