Subject: Re: Honeymoon?
From: scout thompson (one38@one38.org)
Date: Wed Oct 11 2000 - 17:16:31 GMT
I didn't want to rise to Scotties obviously baited call to arms;
but by all means, why do we assume that Seymour was *discontent*,
even? To me its as absurd as calling him "pedophiliac" or saying
that what he possessed was "intellectual superiority."
Anyone familiar with the subject knows that what seymour had was
an absence of intellect. His action was the same as when he
tossed
a rock at the pretty girl in his driveway because he just
couldn't stand it. Just an internal version. Salingers Koan which
makes no sense when limited exclusively to the impermanence of
words.
And, the traditional zen/buddhist schools which Seymour has been
practicing have traditionally defined Hara Kiri [sp?] as
honorable-
to kill oneself in front of a lords house could restore balance
to an insult or to a perceived imbalance, really, of any sort. By
this I'm reminded of his brother in Uncle Wiggly who punches his
fist through a window in order to be fair, upon the happy news
that
his wife is pregnant.
I did always assume they were on honeymoon, its kind of
interesting
to discover that may not be true; like a new find at an
archeological
dig. Thanks, list!
Cecilia Baader wrote:
> curious: why do you say that Muriel is the root of his > discontent?
-
* Unsubscribing? Mail majordomo@roughdraft.org with the message
* UNSUBSCRIBE BANANAFISH
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b25 : Wed Nov 08 2000 - 17:43:40 GMT