That's interesting. I guess I'll have to chck it out, because I was just thinking, while I was checking my miserable 130 messages, about how you wrote that even if Kerouac did write that crumby book =) in one big spurt and then spent so much time revising it, etc., that it still wouldn't matter because a bad start is a bad start is a tautology, I think. I mean, if you're inspired to paint a picture, and you sit down not knowing much about painting, and you end up painting a crappy (but somewhat unique) picture, you could "revise it" all you want. Crap begets crap. Now despite the fact that little of what I post here is well said or even well thought out, I'm just wondering what the implications are of Kerouac actually mulling around that book for years. I think I'd lose even more respect for him. No offense, obviously. Erin ----Original Message Follows---- Date: Fri, 06 Nov 1998 18:16:31 -0600 From: Matthew_Stevenson@baylor.edu Subject: Re: Kerouac To: bananafish@lists.nyu.edu Reply-to: bananafish@lists.nyu.edu one more little bit about kerouac...in the back of this week's TIME magazine is a review of some book that purports to debunk the myth of kerouac's having written On The Road all in one three-month-long, benzedrine-and-caffeine-fueled sprint. the article says there are something like three years of notebooks outlining plots, characters, etc. for the book. beating a dead horse, matt ______________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com