All this deconstructionism is bringing me back to the good old literary debate about whether or not we can truly determine the intent of an author. Personally, I hate to think that Salinger posed that koan and then attempted to throw us clue-like answers in his text. It seems cheap to me. It just makes me wonder about the merits of structuralist readings of texts...I mean, how do we bananafish-listers feel about trying to read Salinger's works by guessing his intent? I read a lot of Derrida recently (despite my ill-constucted, effortless sentences) and seemed to see the merit in his view, but I also just heard a really interesting lecture on the rewards of structual interpretation. Just wondering what you internet-heads think. Erin ----Original Message Follows---- Date: Mon, 02 Nov 1998 12:35:47 -0500 (EST) From: Drnick19@aol.com Subject: Re: Hand clap Zen koan To: bananafish@lists.nyu.edu Reply-to: bananafish@lists.nyu.edu The action described in the Zen koan is shown in the first story, when Seymour's wife, while drying her freshly-polished nails, passes her hand back and forth in the air, much like one hand clapping. It could be an example of Salinger's humor showing through, presenting the Zen action in the most spiritually devoid character in the story. Charles Cohen ______________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com