Re: Russian connection
Matthew_Stevenson@baylor.edu
Sun, 11 Oct 1998 22:24:04 -0500
paul,
as cowardly as it is, i must retreat behind the excuse 'I haven't time to go
into it adequately right now' and leave my assertions naked on the field of
intellectual marketing(?). but i promise to save your post and reply to it at
length sometime soon.
as yellow as a little girl's swimsuit,
matt
On Thu, 08 Oct 1998 05:36:09 -0400 PJanse@compuserve.com (Paul Janse) wrote:
>Matthew,
>
>How exactly do S's stories fly in the face of Chekhov's principles? What is
>"Hapworth" anyway? It seems to me that many stories of Chekhov fly in the
>face of his own principles.
>Salinger a literary revolutionary? What I think an at least very
>exceptional aspect of some of his writings, is the refusal to show us what
>goes on INSIDE the heroes. This is not true for "The cathcher..." of
>course, but we know hardly anything about Franny's, Zooey's, Seymour's (in
>Bananafish), Sergeant X's feelings. We get very detailed descriptions of
>what goes on on the surface and we can draw our own conclusions about the
>inside. Salinger's approach is anti-psychological, I think. See also
>Teddy's opinions on poetry, that there are too many emotions in modern
>Western poetry.
>In this respect he has few followers, I think. There is a very remarkable
>Dutch book which has the same "outside" approach, "Bij Nader Inzien" by
>J.J. Voskuil, whose work has not been translated into English yet, as far
>as I know.
>
>Regards,
>
>Paul