-----Original Message----- From: Camille Scaysbrook <verona_beach@geocities.com> To: bananafish@lists.nyu.edu <bananafish@lists.nyu.edu> Date: Friday, July 17, 1998 8:06 PM Subject: Re: Verse and Universe > >> Very well said, Matt. Your comment that "Shakespeare wrote more things" >> really stirred something in me as a reader. > >Not me. Not me at all. I think that's just so irrelevant! In some ways, I'm >kind of glad we only have one novel from Salinger. It's like `Fawlty >Towers' - two seasons, each one a tight and perfectly polished gem. Compare >that to something like `Roseanne' - started OK, built solidly then >disappeared up its own butt into self indulgent twaddle, sticking around >for at least two seasons later than it was already DOA. What does the size >of the body of work matter ??? `Wuthering Heights' is one of the most >brilliant books ever, but it's Emily Bronte's only book. Does that in any >way make her a lesser writer than say, William Morris, who produced so much >poetry that it fills a whole wall at my university library (some of which >has literally never been opened). Nah, nah. We spend enough time discussing >the few books he did put out, that's enough for me (not to say that I >wouldn't be head of the queue if he brought out a new one). > >Yours soberly (: > >Camille >verona_beach@geocities.com >@ THE ARTS HOLE >www.geocities.com/Hollywood/Theater/6442 >THE INVERTED FOREST >www.angelfire.com/pa/invertedforest I cannot understand how you can be "kind of glad we only have one novel from Salinger." I mean, isn't that a bit like saying "I'm glad John Lennon died in 1980." I guess I might come close to understanding that it's sort of "cool" that Salinger is this kind of mysterious, obscure figure who only wrote a relatively small amount of fiction. However, anyone interested in him enough to be on this list should, in my opinion, still be hungry for more. "that's enough for me" ??? I just don't get it. Patrick