Re: who's Seymour?


Subject: Re: who's Seymour?
From: Joshua Stott (jstott@bigplanet.net)
Date: Thu Jun 15 2000 - 19:18:10 GMT


I should mention that I was specifically refering to the Glass family in
my post, as it was the original question put forth by JJ Flikweert.

Josh
A semi-newcomer and post-qualifier

Joshua Stott wrote:
>
> JJ Flikweert wrote:
> <snip>
> > Then I thought: isn't it completely obvious that all the Glass family
> > members are intended to portray aspects of Salinger's own
> > personality? To me this started to seem indeed completely obvious.
>
> Part of Salinger's genius, whether recognized by the reader or not, is
> that he does not "project" himself into his characters or as you put it
> "members are intended to portray aspects of Salinger's own personality".
>
> Since I don't know Mr. Salinger personally, I'm obviously not offering
> this opinion out of some empirical proof. My opinion is based on,
> however, the background of his life into which he does give us
> glimpses. The biggest clues for me are his writings directly about
> Existentialism or philosophers/writers who are considered
> Existentialists (though like Mr. Salinger himself tells us, some of
> these would definately not call themselves Existentialists today, cf
> Kierkegaard)... I've tried to explain why this would matter and have
> erased my explanation 10 times over, so I'll simply refer to an example:
> Dostoyevski.
>
> Dostoyevski's genius is partly attributable to this very quality that
> I'm claiming for Salinger as well. The characters of the Karamazov
> family, for example, though they are part of a family and obviously have
> similar backgrounds, each character is complicated and unique in a way
> that only an individual "self" can be, not an aspect of a single
> person.
>
> Most, even honest, attempts to write in such a "subjective" manner fail,
> and this is why in this sense writers like Dostoyevski (who would be
> considered an Existentialist in the same way that Kierkegaard would be)
> are geniuses. Yes, I am more than happy to call Salinger a modern day
> Dostoyevski in this sense, or Shakespeare for that matter.
>
> Like I've mentioned earlier, my words are indeed failing me as I try to
> explain my reasons for contradicting your hypothesis, and for that I
> apologize. No, I am not a literary critic, a literature expert, nor did
> I study English at the University, and such being the case, you may want
> to disreguard my opinion on the matter. However, I did study and am
> still currently both in and out of University studying Philosophy
> (emphasis in Existentialism, especially early Existentialists such as
> Kierkegaard), and it is this, my backgroud, that leads me to these
> conclusions. In other words (and how many more will I make you suffer
> through?!?!) from a mostly-strictly philosophical point of view
> (supported by readings of literature experts on this subject exactly) I
> would say that it was neither Salinger's intention for his characters to
> be aspects of himself nor did he fail in his attempt to give each
> character their own life and "ego/self" in his writings.
>
> Thus, I declare Salinger a genius for having done as much. I'm sure
> many will agree with me in my declaration, though possibly for different
> reasons, and they are probably right in their assessment as well (yes,
> I'm assuming my assessment is correct, and yes, I am in love with
> parenthetical phrases and ideas or even entire paragraphs if I'm lucky
> enough to evade my conscience prompting me to stop my babbling before
> entirely everyone quits reading/listening -- which I'm afraid might be
> the case, so...).
>
> That is it. I'd love to be able to explain it in person, but that
> might be a trifle difficult.
>
> Josh
> Still a semi-newcomer and now possibly an un-wanted guest after such a
> longwinded post (and sig -- ha!)
> -
> * Unsubscribing? Mail majordomo@roughdraft.org with the message
> * UNSUBSCRIBE BANANAFISH
-
* Unsubscribing? Mail majordomo@roughdraft.org with the message
* UNSUBSCRIBE BANANAFISH



This archive was generated by hypermail 2b25 : Thu Jul 13 2000 - 23:22:21 GMT