Re: From Daumier to Smith
Pasha Paterson (gpaterso@richmond.edu)
Wed, 15 Sep 1999 14:33:35 -0400
First of all, a big re-hi to the list. I've been gone for quite a while,
and am very, very behind on reading the posts. (About six months, in fact.)
As a rare fan of "Blue Period" (everyone else in my classes hated it), my
attention was instantly drawn to this discussion. I think Russell is on to
something with his argument. I'm a bit wary of the idea that Salinger
relates "balance" to some sort of foot fetish, although such an outlook
would have fascinating implications concerning Seymour's paranoid behavior
in the elevator in "Bananafish".
More interesting to me is his focus on spectators as the cause of the
imbalance. Perhaps Salinger is commenting on D-Smith's consuming need to
be "recognized" for his work. The girl in the shop is arranging some
flowers, but is presumably not trying to win any awards for her efforts.
D-Smith, on the other hand, has joined this art school in an attempt to
feel recognized for his artistic talents. This recognition, however, is a
detriment to his balance, in that he begins to really believe himself to be
an authority in the art world (as is evidenced by his scathing criticism of
most of his students). Perhaps the nature of the epiphany is that good
artists -- like the flower girl and Sister Irma -- must go unrecognized,
unpraised, even unseen, if they are to remain good artists. This is why
the parish terminated Sister Irma's enrollment, and why D-Smith cut the
rest of his students loose once he got back to the art school. By seeking
some sort of praise for their efforts, they are damaging the very spirit
that (would have) made them good artists.
Am I making any sense? Does anyone buy this claim? Does anyone prefer the
foot thing?
_________________________________________________
Pasha Paterson gpaterso@richmond.edu
Owner/Designer/Operator, The Digital Dustbin:
http://www.student.richmond.edu/~gpaterso/
_________________________________________________