Subject: Gee, I was so enjoying our inflated conversation about Modernism..
From: Matt Kozusko (mkozusko@virtual.park.uga.edu)
Date: Thu Feb 27 1997 - 02:41:42 GMT
Gwynn and Blotner (my favorite Salinger critics, as you all know by now)
have suggested that Seymour himself is gay. Or at least that he has a
a terrible time with phallic fixations. And, like all good
psychocritics, who never fail to put libido (heavy libido) before
sexual orientation, they blur the distinctions--they blur the possiblity
of disticntions--between heterosexual and homosexual. The sexual subject
is infinitely more important than the sexual object, which allows the
role of sexual object to be filled by just about anyone or anything.
In a strange (inverted) sense, i'm inclined to agree with their approach
to Salinger. That is, extinguish the libido altogether, and you are left
with the same problem. The sexual object becomes all-consuming, and the
subject no longer insists on his own desires. Of course, the object also
becomes less sexually charged (much less sexually charged) the further you
move towards God-love (ie, the further you move into the Glass family).
?
----------------------------
mkozusko@virtual.park.uga.edu
-
To remove yourself from the bananafish list, send the command:
unsubscribe bananafish
in the body of a message to "Majordomo@mass-usr.com".
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b25 : Mon Oct 09 2000 - 14:59:01 GMT