Re: How to avoid phoniness

Pasha Paterson (gpaterso@richmond.edu)
Fri, 09 Oct 1998 12:34:34 -0400 

I don't think teachers in general and "section men" are equivalent,
either.  As I read "Franny", her conception of a section man seems
to be someone who forces ideas down the students' throats, and who
automatically assumes that any deviation from his own interpretation
of the texts is either flawed or totally wrong.  They present their
own arguments, refusing to admit that they might themselves be less
than complete, with the attitude that their thoughts and opinions
cannot possibly be fallible.  I would argue (and I would hope Franny
would as well) that a _good_ teacher of literature would certainly
present plausible interpretations of the texts, but also encourages
the students to think about the texts further, instead of merely
accepting those opinions as gospel.  I also enjoyed reading French's
books on Salinger, and precisely because he was presenting his
arguments without ruling out alternatives.  Perhaps it was only
because he was "lecturing" from a book that he did not cross the line
into becoming a section man; he had no opportunity to strike down
any of the arguments that followed from or countered his own.  The
experience of reading French's books is analogous to the "good"
model, in that the presentation was thought-provoking, not a
pronouncement from on high.  I did not mean to say that all English
teachers are section men, and I don't think Franny would have
either.  I only referred to the difference between a teacher who
presents arguments to elicit critical thought, and a section man
who lectures on his own opinions to the exclusion of all others,
as if all he knows is all we need to know.


At 10:02 10/09/98 -0600, Will wrote:
>Dar Pasha,
>
>I don't need Franny to tell me who I am...but yes, if "section man" is
>part of what I do, then believe it or not, I'm not the least bit
>horrified if my "section man" work amounts to  more intelligence.
>
>I have both MFA and PhD degrees but more than any degree has taught me, I
>know that reading gives me good ideas.  Mr. Salinger's work has given me
>much and yet I don't believe his approach to "section men" (or section
>women!) is acceptable.  I've learned a lot from "section men" like Warren
>French and John Wenke about Mr. Salinger's writing.  Their ideas and
>others have made my reading experiences richer.
>
>I very much respect how this list is not centered with "section men"
>thinking, but since I've honestly and fairly tried to learn about
>Salinger's fiction, I find nothing at all horrific about Franny's voice
>and know it's part of what has shaped my work.
>
>will
>
>On Fri, 9 Oct 1998, Pasha Paterson wrote:
>
>> At 16:11 10/08/98 -0600, Will Hochman wrote:
>> >before you give me your "come, come" tell me if you've read Geofrey
>> >Hartman's _Criticism in the Wilderness_...as for corrupting the young, I'm
>> >a teacher, what do you expect me to do?
>> 
>> Have you ever been sitting in class talking about Salinger's works and
>> suddenly had the horrifying experience of Franny's voice whispering
>> the words "section man"?  I would hope not.

________________________________________________________

 G.H.G.A.Paterson  (804)662-3737  gpaterso@richmond.edu
________________________________________________________