Subject: Celia's Story, and Fact Meets Fiction?
From: Jim Rovira (jrovira@drew.edu)
Date: Sun Mar 03 2002 - 18:48:03 EST
First, for Celia:
Wonderful story, Celia. It IS almost poetry :). It took no effort to
read. One thing -- this line was confusing:
<<Sure. He immediately dumped the contents into a plastic grocery bag.
Then he placed the bag on the ground and smashed the contents under his
feet.>>
I got it...after two or three reads :). I suggest you substitute the
second occurence of "the contents" with the word "it." Or something.
Anything besides "contents" again.
Now to the Scottie/Will argument:
Ok, but between the counterattacks and counter-counterattacks and
counterapologies, the question still remains:
<<And has little relevance to the human condition in general?>>
I won't go on and on about the problems of talking about the human
condition **in general** -- do we mean the human condition in the bush
of Australia today, the human condition in Mongolia 2500 years ago, or
the human condition in NYC in the 1940s?
I'll just assume that we're talking about the human condition insofar as
us Brits and Americans can understand it right now, today, and are able
to project back a little bit to Salinger's day.
What does Teddy and the Seymour of "Hapworth" have to say to the rest of
us flatheads? We are flatheads, you know, compared to them. Teddy's
prevenience was even attributed to the clarity of his mind and spirit.
What is he supposed to be to us? Someone we aspire to be like? Teddy's
message is pretty straightforward -- quit being an apple eater. Quit
taking in knowledge. Empty yourself out. Very eastern.
Is this all Salinger hoped to say through these characters? The
specific yoga, as I understand it, that's designed for those with
remarkable intellectual gifts is not designed for everyone. The rest of
us chowderheads should be pursuing a different path. So what's Salinger
trying to accomplish by leading the wrong people (the mass of his
readers) down the right path?
Makes me feel like a little bit of hinduism is a dangerous thing.
Jim
Scottie Bowman wrote:
>
> Apart from affording a certain, irrational sense
> of Itoldyouso, doesn't this story rather reinforce
> the fundamental criticism of some of us - that
> the whole Glass myth is based on a very naff
> premise? That the idea of a miraculously gifted
> family gives the Ohmygoshes only to the more
> gullible hicks in a two horse town like Denver?
> And has little relevance to the human condition
> in general?
>
> Scottie B.
>
> -
> * 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 : Mon Jun 24 2002 - 10:26:53 EDT