From oconnort@panix.com Mon Mar 1 07:28:48 2004 Received: from localhost (localhost [[UNIX: localhost]]) by dont.panix.com (8.11.6p2-a/8.8.8/PanixLC1.7) id i21CSmu29266 for bananafish-outgoing; Mon, 1 Mar 2004 07:28:48 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <4042A5F9.FB0CEE67@drew.edu> Date: Sun, 29 Feb 2004 21:54:49 -0500 From: James Rovira Organization: Drew University X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.79 [en]C-CCK-MCD {Drew University:Desktop:20001026} (Win98; U) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: bananafish@roughdraft.org Subject: Re: In Defense of the Associate Professor References: <20040227173637.74207.qmail@web60902.mail.yahoo.com> <4040014C.88B677A7@drew.edu> <002101c3feee$df201880$01a57dc2@j8l6n9> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-bananafish@roughdraft.org Precedence: bulk Reply-To: bananafish@roughdraft.org Ha. I think the difference between online personas and physical presence has a good bit to do with how we relate to language. I was walking through a Barnes and Nobles Bookstore with my wife yesterday afternoon and saw a copy of a book titled, _How to make enemies and alienate people_. "Dang," I said, "I could have written that book..." My wife laughed and said, "well, at least online." I think it partially has to do with having a Jack Nicholson personality (as in, the Jack Nicholson of "As Good As It Gets") when it comes to writing. Anyone who pays close attention to the words they're reading will get annoyed quickly in most online groups, because most people don't. Many people drift through life with almost a blissful, stupid ignorance of what they just said, followed by a dull incredulity when you respond to it. Unless, of course, you're an unusually patient person. More and different kinds of signals are sent in person to person communication, so less is expected and more forgiven. Jim Scottie Bowman wrote: > > In his book, The Brideshead Generation, Humphrey Carpenter > suggests that Evelyn Waugh invented - for his private amusement - > a mask for himself: that of the country squire, snobbish, plethoric, > check-suited & violently reactionary. But as the years went by, > the mask clamped on to the face & he eventually turned into > his own invention. > > I wonder if this happens to the rest of us? (Any views, incidentally, > about the use of the question mark at the end of that sentence?) > Over the last month or two, my own persona on the list has been > finally cemented, I imagine, into that of the crabbed, now dementing, > Hochman-eating misanthrope. Whereas anyone meeting me in the flesh > would be hard pressed to fit that image to the reality confronting him: > this vital, light-hearted, scintillating old charmer - ME. The process > appears to be quite automatic. As soon as I hear the tinkling murmur > of bananafish, the malice takes possession like the first gulp of > Dr Jekyll's elixir. > > What about the rest of you, though? Who lurks behind Jim the Eternally > Reasonable, John the Indiarubber Man, Daniel the Fascist Dam Builder, > Tim the Lamb of God .... et al? > > Scottie B. > > - > * Unsubscribing? Mail majordomo@roughdraft.org with the message > * UNSUBSCRIBE BANANAFISH - * Unsubscribing? Mail majordomo@roughdraft.org with the message * UNSUBSCRIBE BANANAFISH From oconnort@panix.com Tue Mar 2 08:10:14 2004 Received: by dont.panix.com (8.11.6p2-a/8.8.8/PanixLC1.7) id i22DAEe13372 for bananafish-outgoing; Tue, 2 Mar 2004 08:10:14 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <200403011519.i21FJR4K018150@theseus.peterson.af.mil> From: Yocum Daniel R Civ 21 CES/CEOE To: "'bananafish@roughdraft.org'" Subject: RE: still hurt and some salt Date: Mon, 1 Mar 2004 15:19:25 -0000 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2657.72) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Sender: owner-bananafish@roughdraft.org Precedence: bulk Reply-To: bananafish@roughdraft.org I thought he was saying that a pogue mahone was what goes after his sermon, but I could be wrong. No need to stand back Scottie, my aim is true and clean, a little blood but no friendly fire on your shirt front. I don't now any pogue mahone's but an alabado maybe. Daniel '... pogue mahone ...(Perhaps Scottie can supply details.) ...' Oh dear, dear, dear. Dan, Tim has just uttered the vilest, most unforgivable imprecation on you, your forebears & descendents that a Gaedlighe speaker is capable of. I'm really shocked - not only at the expression but to see it issue from such a normally benign & gentle source. I couldn't possibly bring myself to translate - even I who usually takes such snide pleasure in 'dirty, easy labels' & in 'messages that are nasty for the sake of being nasty.' No, I really can't do it. Scottie - standing back - B. - * Unsubscribing? Mail majordomo@roughdraft.org with the message * UNSUBSCRIBE BANANAFISH From oconnort@panix.com Tue Mar 2 08:10:14 2004 Received: by dont.panix.com (8.11.6p2-a/8.8.8/PanixLC1.7) id i22DAEi13378 for bananafish-outgoing; Tue, 2 Mar 2004 08:10:14 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <200403012229.i21MTHCt000638@theseus.peterson.af.mil> From: Yocum Daniel R Civ 21 CES/CEOE To: "'bananafish@roughdraft.org'" Subject: RE: Beating a Dead Horse...and no where to ride to in particular Date: Mon, 1 Mar 2004 22:29:14 -0000 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2657.72) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Sender: owner-bananafish@roughdraft.org Precedence: bulk Reply-To: bananafish@roughdraft.org I know what you mean, we just imported 8 miles of flexible asphalt paved highway from Mexico last month, and now there are drivers threatening us Civil engineers about being biased toward drivers on North bound lanes. The ASCE (American Society of Civil Engineers) and SAME (Society of American Military Engineers) claim that there are plenty of Mechanical engineers who are southbound biased so there is no need to address the Civil's north bound preference. Pretty dumb, yes, but at least I can still do summing and what not, provided there is a piece of charcoal and the back of a shovel handy. Daniel Ah, Daniel, we all make -those- kinds of decisions when we choose a career. Even computer science and engineering aren't sure ways to go these days, with jobs running overseas as fast as boats can carry them. Pretty dumb not to see that... There's no serious threat to higher ed as a whole from any quarter -- it's always needed. Even humanities studies are necessary for at least the teaching of English and history. Jim - * Unsubscribing? Mail majordomo@roughdraft.org with the message * UNSUBSCRIBE BANANAFISH From oconnort@panix.com Tue Mar 2 08:10:13 2004 Received: from localhost (localhost [[UNIX: localhost]]) by dont.panix.com (8.11.6p2-a/8.8.8/PanixLC1.7) id i22DADj13361 for bananafish-outgoing; Tue, 2 Mar 2004 08:10:13 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <200403011505.i21F5IXI009562@theseus.peterson.af.mil> From: Yocum Daniel R Civ 21 CES/CEOE To: "'bananafish@roughdraft.org'" Subject: RE: In Defense of the Associate Professor Date: Mon, 1 Mar 2004 15:05:17 -0000 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2657.72) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Sender: owner-bananafish@roughdraft.org Precedence: bulk Reply-To: bananafish@roughdraft.org Scottie, get it right, a boot wearing, gunslinging, Fascist Dam Builder, but only to dynamite it later. Daniel What about the rest of you, though? Who lurks behind Jim the Eternally Reasonable, John the Indiarubber Man, Daniel the Fascist Dam Builder, Tim the Lamb of God .... et al? Scottie B. - * Unsubscribing? Mail majordomo@roughdraft.org with the message * UNSUBSCRIBE BANANAFISH From oconnort@panix.com Tue Mar 2 08:10:14 2004 Received: by dont.panix.com (8.11.6p2-a/8.8.8/PanixLC1.7) id i22DAE213373 for bananafish-outgoing; Tue, 2 Mar 2004 08:10:14 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <20040301194650.13802.qmail@web60901.mail.yahoo.com> Date: Mon, 1 Mar 2004 11:46:50 -0800 (PST) From: City Cabin Subject: Re: In Defense of the Associate Professor To: bananafish@roughdraft.org In-Reply-To: <4040014C.88B677A7@drew.edu> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Sender: owner-bananafish@roughdraft.org Precedence: bulk Reply-To: bananafish@roughdraft.org --- James Rovira wrote: > Your posts have been great, Bruce, and this last one > is among the best. Thanks, Jim. --Bruce __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Get better spam protection with Yahoo! Mail. http://antispam.yahoo.com/tools - * Unsubscribing? Mail majordomo@roughdraft.org with the message * UNSUBSCRIBE BANANAFISH From oconnort@panix.com Tue Mar 2 22:05:01 2004 Received: from localhost (localhost [[UNIX: localhost]]) by dont.panix.com (8.11.6p2-a/8.8.8/PanixLC1.7) id i23351q20448 for bananafish-outgoing; Tue, 2 Mar 2004 22:05:01 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <4044961C.9070405@drew.edu> Date: Tue, 02 Mar 2004 09:11:40 -0500 From: James Rovira User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.3) Gecko/20030312 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: bananafish@roughdraft.org Subject: Re: Beating a Dead Horse...and no where to ride to in particular References: <200403012229.i21MTHCt000638@theseus.peterson.af.mil> In-Reply-To: <200403012229.i21MTHCt000638@theseus.peterson.af.mil> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-bananafish@roughdraft.org Precedence: bulk Reply-To: bananafish@roughdraft.org Well, yeah. If we had, as a society, to live completely without engineers, or completely without English professors, we'd be better off living completely without English professors. We'd be better off living completely without English profs than completely without garbage collectors, for that matter. But we're not quite in that state, and the study of literature has pretty wide ranging, not easily quantifiable social benefits as well. Jim Yocum Daniel R Civ 21 CES/CEOE wrote: >Pretty dumb, yes, but at least I can still do summing and what >not, provided there is a piece of charcoal and the back of a shovel handy. >Daniel > > > - * Unsubscribing? Mail majordomo@roughdraft.org with the message * UNSUBSCRIBE BANANAFISH From oconnort@panix.com Tue Mar 2 22:05:01 2004 Received: by dont.panix.com (8.11.6p2-a/8.8.8/PanixLC1.7) id i23351320453 for bananafish-outgoing; Tue, 2 Mar 2004 22:05:01 -0500 (EST) From: jrovira@drew.edu To: bananafish@roughdraft.org Cc: jrovira@drew.edu Subject: Chronicle article: A Champion of Cultural Theory? Message-Id: <20040302193451.DD2BC3185DD@wwwmail.chronicle.com> Date: Tue, 2 Mar 2004 14:34:51 -0500 (EST) Sender: owner-bananafish@roughdraft.org Precedence: bulk Reply-To: bananafish@roughdraft.org An article from The Chronicle of Higher Education was forwarded to you by: jrovira@drew.edu The following message was enclosed: More beating on the dead horse -- but it's a pretty telling article about the status of deconstruction and cultural theory in literary criticism today. This article, "A Champion of Cultural Theory?," is available online at this address: http://chronicle.com/temp/email.php?id=xl7ivsi0f7pip7vkko97mubh8kfop0or This article will be available to non-subscribers of The Chronicle for up to five days after it is e-mailed. The article is always available to Chronicle subscribers at this address: http://chronicle.com/free/v50/i20/20b00901.htm _________________________________________________________________ Finding it hard to keep up with all that's happening in academe? The Chronicle's e-mailed Daily Report keeps you up-to-date in a matter of minutes by quickly summarizing current events in higher education while providing links to complete coverage on our subscriber-only Web site. The Daily Report and Web access come with your Chronicle subscription at no extra cost. Order your subscription now at http://chronicle.com/4free?es _________________________________________________________________ Visit us on the Web -- http://chronicle.com Careers & advice -- http://chroniclecareers.com Opinions & critique -- http://chroniclereview.com Arts & Letters Daily -- http://aldaily.com _________________________________________________________________ If you have other problems or questions, please send a message to help@chronicle.com _________________________________________________________________ Copyright (c) 2004 The Chronicle of Higher Education, Inc. - * Unsubscribing? Mail majordomo@roughdraft.org with the message * UNSUBSCRIBE BANANAFISH From oconnort@panix.com Tue Mar 2 22:32:43 2004 Received: by dont.panix.com (8.11.6p2-a/8.8.8/PanixLC1.7) id i233WhF21468 for bananafish-outgoing; Tue, 2 Mar 2004 22:32:43 -0500 (EST) From: "Tim O'Connor" To: bananafish Subject: Spastic Update Date: Tue, 2 Mar 2004 22:28:22 -0500 Message-Id: <20040303032822.3736@mail.panix.com> X-Mailer: CTM PowerMail 4.2.1 us Carbon MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-bananafish@roughdraft.org Precedence: bulk Reply-To: bananafish@roughdraft.org A MESSAGE FROM THE BANANAFISH HOUSE-KEEPING STAFF: Hi, all. I've recently had the worst of combinations: too much work, somewhat under-the-weather health, all in the last few days. I've been trying to be timely about approving list messages, which are still being queued up for manual intervention. ("Approval," by the way, consists entirely of winnowing out spam and virus infections, but never considering the content. I am completely agnostic about what people say.) The one thing I had to mention, because it affects the timeliness of all this. While this list has been getting hit by spam and virus infections (the former set aside; the latter do us no harm, since the list lives on Unix machines and I access it through Unix or Mac computers, and I reject any infectious material), one detail happened today that I've feared for a long time. I want to mention it now because it affects how the list operates. As you may recall, a few weeks ago I set things to manually process mail, which was a change from the good old pre-virus-infection times. The list (no secret) is configured to allow postings only from subscribers. On top of that, because of the risk of a subscriber getting a virus or worm and then having that worm blithely spam the list, I set things to manual delivery only. So now you have to be a subscriber AND you have to wait for me to approve your message. Today, for the first time ever, a slime-bucket spammer (hawking the usual body-enlargement miracle products) SUBSCRIBED to the list (which functions without my involvement) and THEN sent the list some spam which, also, contained a MyDoom worm. If we had not switched over to manual override, then this bad message would have gone out to everyone, and we would have had a mess. I immediately removed the subscriber and sent a note to his/her/its postmaster to complain. I'm also going to write a little filter that permanently trashes any mail from that location. I mention all this to acknowledge that I've been a bit slow lately in approving messages, but also because I wanted you to know that due to the slimy influx, I am slightly slower because non-subscriber posts used to wait in the queue with a special designation, and I could quickly run down the list of junk. Now it will take a bit longer because I have to verify that new subscribers are not here to make trouble. But PLEASE DON'T STOP sending mail in. We love new mail. On another note, we have had a few people join in the last several days. Welcome, new arrivals! I hope you will avail yourselves of the list archives to get a sense of who is who, and that you will introduce yourselves. (We LIKE introductions. They break the ice.) And don't be scared off by this dull house-keeping note. Usually we talk about much more exciting things. Best to all as March begins. Here in NY it was a day to break your heart, warm enough to wear only a light jacket and no hat and real shoes. Of course, this can't compare with John's weather, where it doesn't go below 70 degrees Fahrenheit, but for those of us who eye snow banks warily, it has been an utterly glorious couple of days. On with the show, then. --tim o'connor - * Unsubscribing? Mail majordomo@roughdraft.org with the message * UNSUBSCRIBE BANANAFISH From oconnort@panix.com Tue Mar 2 22:32:43 2004 Received: from localhost (localhost [[UNIX: localhost]]) by dont.panix.com (8.11.6p2-a/8.8.8/PanixLC1.7) id i233WhM21467 for bananafish-outgoing; Tue, 2 Mar 2004 22:32:43 -0500 (EST) From: "Tim O'Connor" To: bananafish Subject: Re: In Defense of the Associate Professor Date: Mon, 1 Mar 2004 08:04:31 -0500 Message-Id: <20040301130431.28337@mail.panix.com> In-Reply-To: <002101c3feee$df201880$01a57dc2@j8l6n9> References: <002101c3feee$df201880$01a57dc2@j8l6n9> X-Mailer: CTM PowerMail 4.2.1 us Carbon MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-bananafish@roughdraft.org Precedence: bulk Reply-To: bananafish@roughdraft.org On Sun, Feb 29, 2004, rbowman@indigo.ie said: > But as the years went by, the mask clamped on to the face & he eventually turned into > his own invention. Certainly a good point. As someone once said to me in a completely other context, we become that which we mock. > I wonder if this happens to the rest of us? (Any views, incidentally, > about the use of the question mark at the end of that sentence?) It's a hypothetical. One can arguably recast it as: I wonder: Does this happen to the rest of us? I would say, without the crutch of my Fowler's (lost in the Sargasso Sea of life), that it would be just fine without a question mark. For example: I wonder sometimes if I will die quietly. She wondered if he really loved her. We wonder whether tonight we will cross the English Channel to invade. They considered whether they would lose their jobs. He decided that a few ECT sessions might quell the voices in his head. Breaking it up leads to a more plausible interrogative: She asked: Do you think I will lose my job because of this? He thought, Will someone perform a spinal tap now? I wonder: Do we all sit around waiting to be shot? and: I wonder if we are only expected to sit around, waiting to be shot. It's one of those situations in which following one's good ear leads to good results, I think. A good ear, perhaps, with a backup copy of Fowler's, just in case. > Over the last month or two, my own persona on the list has been > finally cemented, I imagine, into that of the crabbed, now dementing, > Hochman-eating misanthrope. Whereas anyone meeting me in the flesh > would be hard pressed to fit that image to the reality confronting him: > this vital, light-hearted, scintillating old charmer - ME. Well, like a few others here, I have met you, without prejudice, in the flesh; I have a photograph to prove it my near-Bowman experience, as well as a distinct lack of bite marks around my ankles. I think you choose to be a misanthrope when you want to seem so, yet, perhaps when you think nobody is looking, you are less a "Mr. Hyde" than people might anticipate. However, the role of lovable misanthrope (like political radical, political reactionary, over-educated egghead, know-nothing knuckle- walker, or sexual free-spirit) can sometimes try one's patience, one's tolerance. Scottie, I suspect that you like to churn things up and (to use an American phrase) get people bent out of shape. It is some kind of cross, I think, between Paul's grandfather in "A Hard Day's Night" and Jacques Tati's Mr. Hulot. How's that for mixing and matching metaphors and references and such? > The process > appears to be quite automatic. As soon as I hear the tinkling murmur > of bananafish, the malice takes possession like the first gulp of > Dr Jekyll's elixir. I have always had a hard time with R.L. Stevenson's famous work, because, to my inner ear, "Jekyll" has always sounded somewhat more sinister than "Hyde." I base that on nothing I can explain or defend. > What about the rest of you, though? Who lurks behind Jim the Eternally > Reasonable, John the Indiarubber Man, Daniel the Fascist Dam Builder, > Tim the Lamb of God .... et al? I have met some of the above, but not all, and quite a few people not listed here. Some I have grown to love, some to like, and some (a handful) who make me glad that I live in NY and they live far off in a very different ZIP code. I am no lamb and reject any notions of god-connectedness. Indeed, recent events have made me feel, more than ever, that I fit the image I recently offered of one cursed enough to clean the Augean Stables. Not a particularly pleasant comparison, but it fits. A grim view, I admit. Despite recent crankiness, which probably has more to do with exhaustion and anhedonia than with personal hostility, I am really not as unpleasant as I may seem. In a classic case of work bleeding into life, though, my patience, of late, has been shorter than it has been in the past. All I can say is that I tire of playing the part of the peacemaker, so that when people are unpleasant around me, I am less charitable than I once was. I used to be more utopian (along the lines of, "Why can't we all just get along?"), but now have become less generous with my (stunningly reduced) free time and (bled dry) good nature. Scottie, I think that in most cases, people do not actively think about whether your personal stock is up or down. They just want to be part of a conversation without feeling the sting of a lash, and to speak their minds without being ridiculed, either by sophisticated needling or by "we're all just Cro-Magnons here" antipathy. So, my guess is that when someone experiences being ridiculed, one of several things likely happens. Such people leave the list entirely (which often diminishes the experience of everyone else who remains), feeling that they can live without the unpleasantness. Or they are stunned into silence (in a terrible "Lord of the Flies" turn of events). Or, best of all, they give back as good as they get. (Think of Camille Scaysbrook -- see the list archives, those of you who weren't around back then to see a wonderfully feisty personality.) I tend to fall into the category of "attack the idea, not the person" approach. Most of the time I can live up to that ideal. Not always, but most of the time. However, -- like many pragmatic people -- I can't help if I respond to hostility with more hostility. I admire the philosophies of Gandhi and Martin Luther King, but realistically, I was raised in an environment where you had to punch back if you were punched. To do otherwise was to invite further attacks. (That would be the Malcolm X, rather than the Dr. King, approach, I suppose.) So, yes, I do believe that nasty words are hostile and that if such words lead the person on the receiving end to respond in kind, well, what can you expect? If one makes a practice of ridiculing people, one can scarcely complain when the ridiculed individual replies in kind. In that same vein, I object to casting aspersions on anyone who cannot defend himself. Scottie (since it was you who asked), your communication sometimes falls into the category of needling or even withering. I don't think there are many of us noble enough to avoid replying with hostility when we are treated with passive-aggression. It doesn't mean anyone HATES you. But occasionally you inflame people, and the results are what they are. So it goes. --tim - * Unsubscribing? Mail majordomo@roughdraft.org with the message * UNSUBSCRIBE BANANAFISH From oconnort@panix.com Wed Mar 3 14:06:07 2004 Received: from localhost (localhost [[UNIX: localhost]]) by dont.panix.com (8.11.6p2-a/8.8.8/PanixLC1.7) id i23J67d02911 for bananafish-outgoing; Wed, 3 Mar 2004 14:06:07 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <200403031513.i23FDf97025433@theseus.peterson.af.mil> From: Yocum Daniel R Civ 21 CES/CEOE To: "'bananafish@roughdraft.org'" Subject: RE: Beating a Dead Horse...and no where to ride to in particular Date: Wed, 3 Mar 2004 15:13:41 -0000 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2657.72) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Sender: owner-bananafish@roughdraft.org Precedence: bulk Reply-To: bananafish@roughdraft.org "live with out English professors?", I hope not, just a little self restraint 'tis all. Daniel Well, yeah. If we had, as a society, to live completely without engineers, or completely without English professors, we'd be better off living completely without English professors. We'd be better off living completely without English profs than completely without garbage collectors, for that matter. But we're not quite in that state, and the study of literature has pretty wide ranging, not easily quantifiable social benefits as well. Jim - * Unsubscribing? Mail majordomo@roughdraft.org with the message * UNSUBSCRIBE BANANAFISH From oconnort@panix.com Wed Mar 3 14:06:08 2004 Received: by dont.panix.com (8.11.6p2-a/8.8.8/PanixLC1.7) id i23J68702917 for bananafish-outgoing; Wed, 3 Mar 2004 14:06:08 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <200403031538.i23FcBBg012135@theseus.peterson.af.mil> From: Yocum Daniel R Civ 21 CES/CEOE To: "'bananafish@roughdraft.org'" Subject: RE: In Defense of the Associate Professor Date: Wed, 3 Mar 2004 15:38:07 -0000 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2657.72) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Sender: owner-bananafish@roughdraft.org Precedence: bulk Reply-To: bananafish@roughdraft.org It's funny Tim, I always thought of Jekyll as the more unfavorable name as well. I intend to make a trip to New York in the next year or so, and I hope we get to meet and I think that when you get sight of me you will laugh yourself silly. Scottie, you are ever welcome to finally see Earnest's untamed America, we have a guest room and bathroom available any time. Even though my wife has a Fondness for that green rock, it is unlikely I will ever set foot upon it. Concerning people's reactions: The biggest ill in these modern days is the taking of oneself way, way to seriously. I've never had an ulcer, I haven't lost my hair, it remains a constant color and apart from the infrequent beer or occasional Tylenol to dull the pain of a broken bone stress has never maintained its grip on me, and it does get frequent opportunities. You know, if it doesn't kill you it only makes scar tissue. My step Dad lost some fingers in a sawmill accident and any time he is asked about it he says, "I don't miss them right now." Daniel I have always had a hard time with R.L. Stevenson's famous work, because, to my inner ear, "Jekyll" has always sounded somewhat more sinister than "Hyde." I base that on nothing I can explain or defend. > What about the rest of you, though? Who lurks behind Jim the Eternally > Reasonable, John the Indiarubber Man, Daniel the Fascist Dam Builder, > Tim the Lamb of God .... et al? I have met some of the above, but not all, and quite a few people not listed here. Some I have grown to love, some to like, and some (a handful) who make me glad that I live in NY and they live far off in a very different ZIP code. --tim - * Unsubscribing? Mail majordomo@roughdraft.org with the message * UNSUBSCRIBE BANANAFISH From oconnort@panix.com Wed Mar 3 14:06:08 2004 Received: from localhost (localhost [[UNIX: localhost]]) by dont.panix.com (8.11.6p2-a/8.8.8/PanixLC1.7) id i23J68K02928 for bananafish-outgoing; Wed, 3 Mar 2004 14:06:08 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <20040303172916.75422.qmail@web60901.mail.yahoo.com> Date: Wed, 3 Mar 2004 09:29:16 -0800 (PST) From: City Cabin Subject: Philip Roth re JDS To: bananafish@roughdraft.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Sender: owner-bananafish@roughdraft.org Precedence: bulk Reply-To: bananafish@roughdraft.org >From a speech delivered at Stanford University in 1960: Let me begin with some words about the man who, by reputation at least, is *the* writer of the age. The response of college students to the work of J.D. Salinger indicates that perhaps he, more than anyone else, has not turned his back on the times but, instead, has managed to put his finger on whatever struggle of significance is going on today between self and culture. The Catcher in the Rye and the recent stories in the New Yorker having to do with the Glass family surely take place in the immediate here and now. But what about the self, what about the hero? The question is of particular interest here, for in Salinger, more than in most of his contemporaries, the figure of the writer has lately come to be placed directly in the reader's line of vision, so that there is a connection, finally, between the attitudes of the narrator as, say, brother to Seymour Glass, and as a man who writers by profession. And what of Salinger's heroes? Well, Holden Caulfield, we discover, winds up in an expensive sanitarium. And Seymour Glass commits suicide finally, but prior to that he is the apple of his brother's eye--and why? He has learned to live in this world--but how? By not living in it. By kissing the soles of little girls' feet and throwing rocks at the head of his sweetheart. He is a saint, clearly. But since madness is undesirable and sainthood, for most of us, out of the question, the problem of how to live *in* this world is by no means answered; unless the answer is that one cannot. The only advice we seem to get from Salinger is to be charming on the way to the loony bin. Of course, Salinger is under no obligation to supply advice of any kind to writers or readers--still, I happen to find myself growing more and more curious about this professional writer, Buddy Glass, and how *he* manages to coast through life in the arms of sanity. There is in Salinger the suggestion that mysticism is a possible road to salvation; at least some of his characters respond well to an intensified, emotional religious belief. Now my own reading of Zen is minuscule, but as I understand it from Salinger, the deeper we go into this world, the further we can get away from it. If you contemplate a potato long enough, it stops being a potato in the usual sense; unfortunately, however, it is in the usual sense that we have to deal with from day to day. For all his loving handling of the world's objects there seems to me, in Salinger's Glass family stories as in The Catcher, a spurning of life as it is lived in the immediate world--this place and time is viewed as unworthy of those few precious people who have been set down in it only to be maddened and destroyed. *** >From a 1973 conversation: "Fame," Rilke wrote, "is no more than the quintessence of all the misunderstandings collecting around a new name." Mailerism and Salingerism are vigorous, highly conscious responses to that kind of misunderstanding: the first assaults the misunderstanding at the source, challenging its timidity and conventionality ("You think I'm bad? You don't know how bad! You think I'm a brute? Well, I'm a courtly gentleman! You think I'm a gentleman? I'm a brute!" and so on), deliberately, as it were, *exceeding* the misunderstanding in an indefatigable act of public self-realization; the second, Salingerism, refuses to be vexed by misunderstanding (and misappropriation) in any way, even, if need be, by not being published. I suspect that serious American novelists with a sense of an audience swing on a pendulum from Mailerism to Salingerism, each coming to rest at a point on the arc that appears (and needless to say, a man can be wrong) to be congruent with his temperament and nourishing to the work. *** >From a 1987 conversation: When I was a student, virtually every writer I read influenced me. As an undergraduate, I suppose the most telling book was Catcher in the Rye. I think in a way I discovered narrative voice by reading it and Huckleberry Finn--not that I wanted to copy either writer, but I discovered what the power of a voice was. *** --Bruce __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Search - Find what you’re looking for faster http://search.yahoo.com - * Unsubscribing? Mail majordomo@roughdraft.org with the message * UNSUBSCRIBE BANANAFISH From oconnort@panix.com Wed Mar 3 14:06:08 2004 Received: by dont.panix.com (8.11.6p2-a/8.8.8/PanixLC1.7) id i23J68o02933 for bananafish-outgoing; Wed, 3 Mar 2004 14:06:08 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <20040303174718.54622.qmail@web60902.mail.yahoo.com> Date: Wed, 3 Mar 2004 09:47:18 -0800 (PST) From: City Cabin Subject: Re: In Defense of the Associate Professor To: bananafish@roughdraft.org In-Reply-To: <20040301130431.28337@mail.panix.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Sender: owner-bananafish@roughdraft.org Precedence: bulk Reply-To: bananafish@roughdraft.org --- Tim O'Connor wrote: > > Scottie, I suspect that you like to churn things up > and (to use an > American phrase) get people bent out of shape. It > is some kind of cross, > I think, between Paul's grandfather in "A Hard Day's > Night" and Jacques > Tati's Mr. Hulot. > > I thought tim's essay-length post splendid. My only quibble is with the comparison to Tati's Mr. Hulot. Hulot, to my mind, is one of cinema's most gentle, innocent, and lasting inventions. Granted, people don't know how to take him, and he causes havoc, but on Hulot's part, it is *un*intentional. There is a virginal purity to his perspective and in his interactions with the other characters. His encounters with life's bewildering aspects (many of them man-made) evoke a pristine joy in the viewer. I heartily recommend the handful of films in which the immortal Hulot lives: Jour de Fete, Mr. Hulot's Holiday, Mon Oncle, Traffic, and Playtime. (Someone else will have to defend Paul's grandfather.) --Bruce __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Search - Find what you’re looking for faster http://search.yahoo.com - * Unsubscribing? Mail majordomo@roughdraft.org with the message * UNSUBSCRIBE BANANAFISH From oconnort@panix.com Wed Mar 3 14:06:09 2004 Received: by dont.panix.com (8.11.6p2-a/8.8.8/PanixLC1.7) id i23J69A02934 for bananafish-outgoing; Wed, 3 Mar 2004 14:06:09 -0500 (EST) X-Originating-IP: [199.104.18.61] X-Originating-Email: [ralanya@hotmail.com] X-Sender: ralanya@hotmail.com From: "Robin Dudley" To: bananafish@roughdraft.org Subject: RE: Holden and Death Date: Wed, 03 Mar 2004 18:04:53 +0000 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed Message-ID: X-OriginalArrivalTime: 03 Mar 2004 18:04:56.0601 (UTC) FILETIME=[09278890:01C4014A] Sender: owner-bananafish@roughdraft.org Precedence: bulk Reply-To: bananafish@roughdraft.org Dear Bananafishers, Regarding Pinsker on Holden's death complex: YES. Jane Mendelsohn in the last essay in Kotzen's "With Love and Squalor" writes that she found "references to death on almost every other page." Allie, James Castle, Holden's hurt hand all confirm my theory: since Holden appeared directly after Babe and Vincent, and then Vincent dies; since Holden was originally a "dead brother"...Certainly, Holden is obsessed with death, or rather Salinger was when he wrote Holden in TCITR. D.B. probably stands for Dead Brother, (aesthetically dead) unless the D is for David, also. Holden Caulfield means "Hold-in" the "Caul-field." The Grim Reaper wears a Caul...I think Catcher is a war story, that Holden is a surrogate soldier telling a war story without ever having to mention the Hurtgen Forest or Jeeps or gas masks. Yes, yes. yes. Robin >From: Michael Allen Nowek >Reply-To: bananafish@roughdraft.org >To: bananafish@roughdraft.org >Subject: Holden and Death >Date: Fri, 27 Feb 2004 17:33:20 -0500 (EST) > >Hello Everyone, >I just finished Sanford PinSker's "CITR: Innocence Under Pressure" and >a good section of the book dealt with all of the elements in Catcher >dealing with death (Allie, mummies...). Pinsker suggests that Holden's >obsession with stasis may have to do with an obsession with death >rather than life, because life is messy and always changing. Do any of >you think that Holden has a death complex? >-Mike N >- >* Unsubscribing? Mail majordomo@roughdraft.org with the message >* UNSUBSCRIBE BANANAFISH _________________________________________________________________ Store more e-mails with MSN Hotmail Extra Storage – 4 plans to choose from! http://click.atdmt.com/AVE/go/onm00200362ave/direct/01/ - * Unsubscribing? Mail majordomo@roughdraft.org with the message * UNSUBSCRIBE BANANAFISH From oconnort@panix.com Wed Mar 3 14:45:35 2004 Received: from localhost (localhost [[UNIX: localhost]]) by dont.panix.com (8.11.6p2-a/8.8.8/PanixLC1.7) id i23JjZu04986 for bananafish-outgoing; Wed, 3 Mar 2004 14:45:35 -0500 (EST) X400-Received: by mta Salem-MTA1 in /c=US/admd= /prmd=or.gov/; Relayed; 03 Mar 2004 11:11:07 -0800 X400-Received: by /c=US/admd= /prmd=or.gov/; Relayed; 03 Mar 2004 11:11:07 -0800 X400-MTS-Identifier: [/c=US/admd= /prmd=or.gov/; 40462DC5.ADC2.F4D9.000] Content-Identifier: 00B2A40462DCB003 Content-Return: Allowed X400-Content-Type: P2-1988 ( 22 ) Conversion: Allowed Original-Encoded-Information-Types: IA5-Text Disclose-Recipients: Prohibited Alternate-Recipient: Allowed X400-Originator: Michael.J.Anello@state.or.us X400-Recipients: non-disclosure; Message-Id: <40462DC5.ADC2.F4D9.000*/c=us/admd=/prmd=or.gov/o=HR/ou=gwise/s=Anello/g=Michael/i=J/@MHS> Date: 03 Mar 2004 11:11:07 -0800 From: ANELLO Michael J To: bananafish@roughdraft.org, ralanya@hotmail.com Subject: RE: Holden and Death Sender: owner-bananafish@roughdraft.org Precedence: bulk Reply-To: bananafish@roughdraft.org Wow, Robin. Who are you, and why are you so awesome? -Mike >>> ralanya@hotmail.com 03/03/04 11:07AM >>> Dear Bananafishers, Regarding Pinsker on Holden's death complex: YES. Jane Mendelsohn in the last essay in Kotzen's "With Love and Squalor" writes that she found "references to death on almost every other page." Allie, James Castle, Holden's hurt hand all confirm my theory: since Holden appeared directly after Babe and Vincent, and then Vincent dies; since Holden was originally a "dead brother"...Certainly, Holden is obsessed with death, or rather Salinger was when he wrote Holden in TCITR. D.B. probably stands for Dead Brother, (aesthetically dead) unless the D is for David, also. Holden Caulfield means "Hold-in" the "Caul-field." The Grim Reaper wears a Caul...I think Catcher is a war story, that Holden is a surrogate soldier telling a war story without ever having to mention the Hurtgen Forest or Jeeps or gas masks. Yes, yes. yes. Robin >From: Michael Allen Nowek >Reply-To: bananafish@roughdraft.org >To: bananafish@roughdraft.org >Subject: Holden and Death >Date: Fri, 27 Feb 2004 17:33:20 -0500 (EST) > >Hello Everyone, >I just finished Sanford PinSker's "CITR: Innocence Under Pressure" and >a good section of the book dealt with all of the elements in Catcher >dealing with death (Allie, mummies...). Pinsker suggests that Holden's >obsession with stasis may have to do with an obsession with death >rather than life, because life is messy and always changing. Do any of >you think that Holden has a death complex? >-Mike N >- >* Unsubscribing? Mail majordomo@roughdraft.org with the message >* UNSUBSCRIBE BANANAFISH _________________________________________________________________ Store more e-mails with MSN Hotmail Extra Storage 4 plans to choose from! http://click.atdmt.com/AVE/go/onm00200362ave/direct/01/ - * Unsubscribing? Mail majordomo@roughdraft.org with the message * UNSUBSCRIBE BANANAFISH - * Unsubscribing? Mail majordomo@roughdraft.org with the message * UNSUBSCRIBE BANANAFISH From oconnort@panix.com Wed Mar 3 16:41:22 2004 Received: from localhost (localhost [[UNIX: localhost]]) by dont.panix.com (8.11.6p2-a/8.8.8/PanixLC1.7) id i23LfMo10532 for bananafish-outgoing; Wed, 3 Mar 2004 16:41:22 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <40463B61.9090707@drew.edu> Date: Wed, 03 Mar 2004 15:09:05 -0500 From: James Rovira User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.3) Gecko/20030312 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: bananafish@roughdraft.org Subject: Re: Holden and Death References: <40462DC5.ADC2.F4D9.000*/c=us/admd=/prmd=or.gov/o=HR/ou=gwise/s=Anello/g=Michael/i=J/@MHS> In-Reply-To: <40462DC5.ADC2.F4D9.000*/c=us/admd=/prmd=or.gov/o=HR/ou=gwise/s=Anello/g=Michael/i=J/@MHS> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-bananafish@roughdraft.org Precedence: bulk Reply-To: bananafish@roughdraft.org That IS a pretty interesting reading. Jim ANELLO Michael J wrote: >Wow, Robin. Who are you, and why are you so awesome? > >-Mike > > > >>>>ralanya@hotmail.com 03/03/04 11:07AM >>> >>>> >>>> >Dear Bananafishers, >Regarding Pinsker on Holden's death complex: >YES. Jane Mendelsohn in the last essay in Kotzen's "With Love and Squalor" >writes that she found "references to death on almost every other page." >Allie, James Castle, Holden's hurt hand all confirm my theory: since Holden >appeared directly after Babe and Vincent, and then Vincent dies; since >Holden was originally a "dead brother"...Certainly, Holden is obsessed with >death, or rather Salinger was when he wrote Holden in TCITR. D.B. probably >stands for Dead Brother, (aesthetically dead) unless the D is for David, >also. Holden Caulfield means "Hold-in" the "Caul-field." The Grim Reaper >wears a Caul...I think Catcher is a war story, that Holden is a surrogate >soldier telling a war story without ever having to mention the Hurtgen >Forest or Jeeps or gas masks. Yes, yes. yes. >Robin > > > > > - * Unsubscribing? Mail majordomo@roughdraft.org with the message * UNSUBSCRIBE BANANAFISH From oconnort@panix.com Wed Mar 3 16:41:23 2004 Received: by dont.panix.com (8.11.6p2-a/8.8.8/PanixLC1.7) id i23LfN410537 for bananafish-outgoing; Wed, 3 Mar 2004 16:41:23 -0500 (EST) X-Originating-IP: [63.167.237.65] X-Originating-Email: [lmanningvines@hotmail.com] X-Sender: lmanningvines@hotmail.com From: "L. Manning Vines" To: Subject: Questioning Question Marks (was "Re: In Defense of the Associate Professor") Date: Wed, 3 Mar 2004 16:28:43 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1158 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1165 Message-ID: X-OriginalArrivalTime: 03 Mar 2004 21:28:49.0642 (UTC) FILETIME=[849D74A0:01C40166] Sender: owner-bananafish@roughdraft.org Precedence: bulk Reply-To: bananafish@roughdraft.org Scottie wonders about the use of the question mark in the sentence: I wonder if this happens to the rest of us? Of course this sentence is not explicitly a question, which makes the question mark non-standard, but I think such use of the mark is becoming quite common. A recently documented phenomenon in English which is also becoming quite common (though it remains rare in speakers over a certain age), which is sometimes called "up-talking" or something similar, is the use of interrogative intonation on declarative sentences. I wonder if these phenomena can be correlated. Native speakers of English (though this is not unique to English) have for a very long time (always? since before English?) raised the pitch of their voice at the tail end of certain questions. It has typically been yes/no questions that reliably receive this intonation, though sometimes other sorts of questions receive it too. ("Speakers" of American Sign Language raise their eyebrows with yes/no questions and tend to scrunch them downward for other questions.) Speakers who avoid this intonation are usually effecting a stern, authoritarian air. The effect of the increased pitch seems to be of entreating, of begging or inviting a positive answer (though the intonation becomes common even when a positive answer is not anticipated or desired, unless the speaker is being cold and rude), and perhaps this is why it is not so common on questions whose answers are other than simple affirmations or denials. In the past few decades this intonation has become common on certain declarative sentences -- and I understand that it has spread to everywhere in the English-speaking world, even before it was ever documented in television or movies (this fact has encouraged some linguists to further doubt the strength of the media to control or homogenize linguistic phenomena). The declarations that usually receive the intonation occur when the speaker is unsure of himself, or is seeking a diplomatic resolution to a problem or sympathy or common ground with his listeners. It is more frequent in female speech than male, and is especially regular in academic contexts (oral quizzing, spoken demonstrations and presentations, and so on). My ear very naturally produces the tone when I read sentences that begin with "I wonder" and end with a question mark. When I read the same sentence with a period I do not naturally produce the tone. The effect feels quite different, though the difference is vague and difficult to describe. I wonder if the question mark in English has been becoming less and less a grammatical indicator -- for this it is usually superfluous anyway -- while becoming more and more an indicator of pitch. Ancient Greek, for instance, was a heavily tonal language which came to indicate pitch with three diacritical marks over certain vowels. I wonder if our question mark is headed this way? -Robbie P.S. A question mark would be quite inappropriate on my antepenultimate sentence (by which I mean the first in the paragraph preceding my name), while perfectly appropriate on my final sentence, though both begin with "I wonder. . . ." I think the difference is pitch. - * Unsubscribing? Mail majordomo@roughdraft.org with the message * UNSUBSCRIBE BANANAFISH From oconnort@panix.com Wed Mar 3 19:14:55 2004 Received: from localhost (localhost [[UNIX: localhost]]) by dont.panix.com (8.11.6p2-a/8.8.8/PanixLC1.7) id i240Et716983 for bananafish-outgoing; Wed, 3 Mar 2004 19:14:55 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <002301c40178$3cb93310$0101a8c0@Monster> From: "Kenneth" To: References: <40462DC5.ADC2.F4D9.000*/c=us/admd=/prmd=or.gov/o=HR/ou=gwise/s=Anello/g=Michael/i=J/@MHS> Subject: Re: Holden and Death Date: Wed, 3 Mar 2004 18:35:39 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1158 X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1165 X-Authentication-Info: Submitted using SMTP AUTH at out011.verizon.net from [138.89.20.229] at Wed, 3 Mar 2004 17:35:36 -0600 Sender: owner-bananafish@roughdraft.org Precedence: bulk Reply-To: bananafish@roughdraft.org This one's outta the ballpark. And Mike, you know better. Apart from Allie's (belatedly inserted) name, there's no correlation between Cartcher and the war. First off, it was largely written during the war. Secondly, the New Yorker people badgered Salinger to write a major work about the war for years after 45 and after 52. While he repeatedly remarked about considering the possibility, in the end, he decided not to. Had he done so already, by way of Catcher, wouldn't he have mentioned it? His short stories which do deal with war condemn it mainly concerning the issue of induction. If there is any parralell between Catcher and the war (actually, the Army - alway's capitalized) it involves induction - an issue which is easily assumed by society after 45. He doesn't so much change that message as he changes or updates the props which represent it. Aside from that, Salinger is remarkably silent regarding the war and the vital questions it raises. (Okay, he speaks eloquently for his fellow-soldiers in Esme, but that neither condemns war nor shows any obsession with death.) It seems that far from being horrified by his military experience, he consistantly sought promotions and areas where he could more actively serve. In short, he seems to have taken his military service as his duty. Could this be due to his military upbringing? I don't know. I especially cannot agree with the interpretation of a "Grim Reaper" kind of death in Catcher. Salinger's not about that kind of death at all. He's about the continuity of life despite death, sometimes even through it. Allie lives on through Holden and Holden will live on through Phoebe (and let's not get into the Glass Clan). It's a level of human connectivity that, far from being "obsessed" with death, defies it. Most of Salinger's characters greet (yes, greet) death with a certain kind of enlightened aplomb having gained that revelation. To miss these points is to miss the boat. Pinsker my butt. ----- Original Message ----- From: "ANELLO Michael J" To: ; ralanya@hotmail.com Sent: Wednesday, March 03, 2004 2:11 PM Subject: RE: Holden and Death > Wow, Robin. Who are you, and why are you so awesome? > > -Mike > > >>> ralanya@hotmail.com 03/03/04 11:07AM >>> > Dear Bananafishers, > Regarding Pinsker on Holden's death complex: > YES. Jane Mendelsohn in the last essay in Kotzen's "With Love and Squalor" > writes that she found "references to death on almost every other page." > Allie, James Castle, Holden's hurt hand all confirm my theory: since Holden > appeared directly after Babe and Vincent, and then Vincent dies; since > Holden was originally a "dead brother"...Certainly, Holden is obsessed with > death, or rather Salinger was when he wrote Holden in TCITR. D.B. probably > stands for Dead Brother, (aesthetically dead) unless the D is for David, > also. Holden Caulfield means "Hold-in" the "Caul-field." The Grim Reaper > wears a Caul...I think Catcher is a war story, that Holden is a surrogate > soldier telling a war story without ever having to mention the Hurtgen > Forest or Jeeps or gas masks. Yes, yes. yes. > Robin > > >From: Michael Allen Nowek > >Reply-To: bananafish@roughdraft.org > >To: bananafish@roughdraft.org > >Subject: Holden and Death > >Date: Fri, 27 Feb 2004 17:33:20 -0500 (EST) > > > >Hello Everyone, > >I just finished Sanford PinSker's "CITR: Innocence Under Pressure" and > >a good section of the book dealt with all of the elements in Catcher > >dealing with death (Allie, mummies...). Pinsker suggests that Holden's > >obsession with stasis may have to do with an obsession with death > >rather than life, because life is messy and always changing. Do any of > >you think that Holden has a death complex? > >-Mike N > >- > >* Unsubscribing? Mail majordomo@roughdraft.org with the message > >* UNSUBSCRIBE BANANAFISH > > _________________________________________________________________ > Store more e-mails with MSN Hotmail Extra Storage 4 plans to choose from! > http://click.atdmt.com/AVE/go/onm00200362ave/direct/01/ > > - > * Unsubscribing? Mail majordomo@roughdraft.org with the message > * UNSUBSCRIBE BANANAFISH > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > - > * Unsubscribing? Mail majordomo@roughdraft.org with the message > * UNSUBSCRIBE BANANAFISH > - * Unsubscribing? Mail majordomo@roughdraft.org with the message * UNSUBSCRIBE BANANAFISH From oconnort@panix.com Wed Mar 3 19:14:54 2004 Received: by dont.panix.com (8.11.6p2-a/8.8.8/PanixLC1.7) id i240EsG16972 for bananafish-outgoing; Wed, 3 Mar 2004 19:14:54 -0500 (EST) X-Originating-IP: [63.167.237.65] X-Originating-Email: [lmanningvines@hotmail.com] X-Sender: lmanningvines@hotmail.com From: "L. Manning Vines" To: Subject: Re: In Defense of the Associate Professor Date: Wed, 3 Mar 2004 16:51:53 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1158 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1165 Message-ID: X-OriginalArrivalTime: 03 Mar 2004 21:51:55.0697 (UTC) FILETIME=[BEC4AA10:01C40169] Sender: owner-bananafish@roughdraft.org Precedence: bulk Reply-To: bananafish@roughdraft.org Tim writes, hypothetically, that some people who are ridiculed on the list might leave, deciding that they can live without the unpleasantness, and the rest of us are thus deprived. I don't doubt that this is true, but I have a vague and uncertain suspicion that this statement might be only somewhat hypothetical -- and somewhat built to fit the model of this thread's eponymous educator. In case this suspicion is correct, I am compelled to say something in Scottie's defense, since, contrary to what virtually everybody said at the time (including Will himself), at least in the final posts, this is not quite what happened. Though there may have been a long history of ridicule (of various degrees of sophistication or gentleness), the post that finally drove Will to suggest (hypothetical) physical violence and to leave the list -- when I, at least, had never witnessed such a reaction from him on this list before -- contained no ridicule at all. What it contained was several archaic ethnic epithets, one of which Will referred to, incorrectly, as though it were directed at him (and which, incidentally, is the perfectly ordinary Yiddish word for Jew). It should be added, because it does make it a difference to some people, that Scottie used the epithets with reference to old friends and clearly not as pejoratives. Perhaps old teasing got to Will and he reached his breaking point when he heard that word (whatever its context). But it seems important to me that he left not directly subsequent to ridicule but directly subsequent to a word that was very offensive to him, and I fear that suggesting otherwise is unfair to Scottie. -Robbie - * Unsubscribing? Mail majordomo@roughdraft.org with the message * UNSUBSCRIBE BANANAFISH From oconnort@panix.com Wed Mar 3 19:14:55 2004 Received: by dont.panix.com (8.11.6p2-a/8.8.8/PanixLC1.7) id i240EtL16982 for bananafish-outgoing; Wed, 3 Mar 2004 19:14:55 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <200403032157.i23LvoTY023425@theseus.peterson.af.mil> From: Yocum Daniel R Civ 21 CES/CEOE To: "'bananafish@roughdraft.org'" Subject: RE: Questioning Question Marks (was "Re: In Defense of the Associ ate Professor") Date: Wed, 3 Mar 2004 21:57:50 -0000 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2657.72) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Sender: owner-bananafish@roughdraft.org Precedence: bulk Reply-To: bananafish@roughdraft.org Robbie, quit all this sham wondering and declare your question; Is our question mark headed this way?; does the reader (or even speaker) care about the 'I' and the state of being called 'wonder' in the speaker? I wonder. Daniel I wonder if the question mark in English has been becoming less and less a grammatical indicator -- for this it is usually superfluous anyway -- while becoming more and more an indicator of pitch. Ancient Greek, for instance, was a heavily tonal language which came to indicate pitch with three diacritical marks over certain vowels. I wonder if our question mark is headed this way? -Robbie P.S. A question mark would be quite inappropriate on my antepenultimate sentence (by which I mean the first in the paragraph preceding my name), while perfectly appropriate on my final sentence, though both begin with "I wonder. . . ." I think the difference is pitch. - * Unsubscribing? Mail majordomo@roughdraft.org with the message * UNSUBSCRIBE BANANAFISH From oconnort@panix.com Wed Mar 3 19:14:54 2004 Received: from localhost (localhost [[UNIX: localhost]]) by dont.panix.com (8.11.6p2-a/8.8.8/PanixLC1.7) id i240Es016970 for bananafish-outgoing; Wed, 3 Mar 2004 19:14:54 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <200403032146.i23Lkxlm017720@theseus.peterson.af.mil> From: Yocum Daniel R Civ 21 CES/CEOE To: "'bananafish@roughdraft.org'" Subject: RE: Holden and Death Date: Wed, 3 Mar 2004 21:46:57 -0000 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2657.72) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Sender: owner-bananafish@roughdraft.org Precedence: bulk Reply-To: bananafish@roughdraft.org Great analysis, the ducks are also death, Holden wants to know where Grim winters so he can plan his winter school vacation accordingly. The cabbie was irritated by the duck talk because just a few days before Grim left some of his wormy luggage in the trunk of his Taxi. That is why it smelled so bad. You'd be a wise guy too if you had to smell fermenting ass all day long, I mean those pine air fresheners are pretty weak. Daniel Wow, Robin. Who are you, and why are you so awesome? -Mike >>> ralanya@hotmail.com 03/03/04 11:07AM >>> Dear Bananafishers, Regarding Pinsker on Holden's death complex: YES. Jane Mendelsohn in the last essay in Kotzen's "With Love and Squalor" writes that she found "references to death on almost every other page." Allie, James Castle, Holden's hurt hand all confirm my theory: since Holden appeared directly after Babe and Vincent, and then Vincent dies; since Holden was originally a "dead brother"...Certainly, Holden is obsessed with death, or rather Salinger was when he wrote Holden in TCITR. D.B. probably stands for Dead Brother, (aesthetically dead) unless the D is for David, also. Holden Caulfield means "Hold-in" the "Caul-field." The Grim Reaper wears a Caul...I think Catcher is a war story, that Holden is a surrogate soldier telling a war story without ever having to mention the Hurtgen Forest or Jeeps or gas masks. Yes, yes. yes. Robin - * Unsubscribing? Mail majordomo@roughdraft.org with the message * UNSUBSCRIBE BANANAFISH From oconnort@panix.com Wed Mar 3 21:25:21 2004 Received: from localhost (localhost [[UNIX: localhost]]) by dont.panix.com (8.11.6p2-a/8.8.8/PanixLC1.7) id i242PLD22539 for bananafish-outgoing; Wed, 3 Mar 2004 21:25:21 -0500 (EST) Subject: Fw: Questioning Question Marks (was From: "James J. Rovira" To: bananafish@roughdraft.org Date: Wed, 03 Mar 2004 20:28:45 -0500 X-Mailer: NetMail ModWeb Module X-Sender: jrovira MIME-Version: 1.0 Message-ID: <1078363725.8a1ab58jrovira@drew.edu> Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="------=_ModWebBOUNDARY_8a1ab58_1078363725" Sender: owner-bananafish@roughdraft.org Precedence: bulk Reply-To: bananafish@roughdraft.org This is a multi-part message in MIME format. --------=_ModWebBOUNDARY_8a1ab58_1078363725 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Ha -- great post, Robbie. Let me offer an alternative reading -- another p= ossibility. "I wonder if this happens to the rest of us?" was the original sentence. What I think this "means" (with the question ma= rk) is: "Does this happen to the rest of us?" I think this translation is the product of different ranges of meanings bei= ng applied to the words, "I wonder" than its direct, declarative, standar= d meaning. "Wonder" as an experience has become so linked to the process= of questioning, in our thinking, that it's common to use it in a sentenc= e to introduce a question. Jim --------=_ModWebBOUNDARY_8a1ab58_1078363725 Content-Type: message/rfc822; name="Questioning Question Marks (was "Re: In Defense of the Associate Professor").eml" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Content-Disposition: inline X-Auth-No: Return-Path: Received: from smtppub.drew.edu not authenticated [192.107.39.205] by drew.edu with NetMail SMTP Agent $Revision: 3.44 $ on Linux; Wed, 03 Mar 2004 16:45:12 -0500 Received: from localhost (smtppub.drew.edu [192.107.39.205]) by smtppub.drew.edu (Postfix) with ESMTP id 97DBA12405F for ; Wed, 3 Mar 2004 16:45:12 -0500 (EST) Received: from smtppub.drew.edu ([192.107.39.205]) by localhost (paperboy.drew.edu [192.107.39.205]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 00901-01 for ; Wed, 3 Mar 2004 16:45:12 -0500 (EST) Received: from mail1.panix.com (mail1.panix.com [166.84.1.72]) by smtppub.drew.edu (Postfix) with ESMTP id 394CD12405D for ; Wed, 3 Mar 2004 16:45:12 -0500 (EST) Received: from dont.panix.com (dont.panix.com [166.84.0.211]) by mail1.panix.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5DDE8491E5; Wed, 3 Mar 2004 16:42:12 -0500 (EST) Received: by dont.panix.com (8.11.6p2-a/8.8.8/PanixLC1.7) id i23LfN410537 for bananafish-outgoing; Wed, 3 Mar 2004 16:41:23 -0500 (EST) X-Originating-IP: [63.167.237.65] X-Originating-Email: [lmanningvines@hotmail.com] X-Sender: lmanningvines@hotmail.com From: "L. Manning Vines" To: Subject: Questioning Question Marks (was "Re: In Defense of the Associate Professor") Date: Wed, 3 Mar 2004 16:28:43 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1158 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1165 Message-ID: X-OriginalArrivalTime: 03 Mar 2004 21:28:49.0642 (UTC) FILETIME=[849D74A0:01C40166] Sender: owner-bananafish@roughdraft.org Precedence: bulk Reply-To: bananafish@roughdraft.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.1 tagged_above=0.0 required=10.0 tests=FORGED_HOTMAIL_RCVD2 X-Spam-Level: Scottie wonders about the use of the question mark in the sentence: I wonder if this happens to the rest of us? Of course this sentence is not explicitly a question, which makes the question mark non-standard, but I think such use of the mark is becoming quite common. A recently documented phenomenon in English which is also becoming quite common (though it remains rare in speakers over a certain age), which is sometimes called "up-talking" or something similar, is the use of interrogative intonation on declarative sentences. I wonder if these phenomena can be correlated. Native speakers of English (though this is not unique to English) have for a very long time (always? since before English?) raised the pitch of their voice at the tail end of certain questions. It has typically been yes/no questions that reliably receive this intonation, though sometimes other sorts of questions receive it too. ("Speakers" of American Sign Language raise their eyebrows with yes/no questions and tend to scrunch them downward for other questions.) Speakers who avoid this intonation are usually effecting a stern, authoritarian air. The effect of the increased pitch seems to be of entreating, of begging or inviting a positive answer (though the intonation becomes common even when a positive answer is not anticipated or desired, unless the speaker is being cold and rude), and perhaps this is why it is not so common on questions whose answers are other than simple affirmations or denials. In the past few decades this intonation has become common on certain declarative sentences -- and I understand that it has spread to everywhere in the English-speaking world, even before it was ever documented in television or movies (this fact has encouraged some linguists to further doubt the strength of the media to control or homogenize linguistic phenomena). The declarations that usually receive the intonation occur when the speaker is unsure of himself, or is seeking a diplomatic resolution to a problem or sympathy or common ground with his listeners. It is more frequent in female speech than male, and is especially regular in academic contexts (oral quizzing, spoken demonstrations and presentations, and so on). My ear very naturally produces the tone when I read sentences that begin with "I wonder" and end with a question mark. When I read the same sentence with a period I do not naturally produce the tone. The effect feels quite different, though the difference is vague and difficult to describe. I wonder if the question mark in English has been becoming less and less a grammatical indicator -- for this it is usually superfluous anyway -- while becoming more and more an indicator of pitch. Ancient Greek, for instance, was a heavily tonal language which came to indicate pitch with three diacritical marks over certain vowels. I wonder if our question mark is headed this way? -Robbie P.S. A question mark would be quite inappropriate on my antepenultimate sentence (by which I mean the first in the paragraph preceding my name), while perfectly appropriate on my final sentence, though both begin with "I wonder. . . ." I think the difference is pitch. - * Unsubscribing? Mail majordomo@roughdraft.org with the message * UNSUBSCRIBE BANANAFISH --------=_ModWebBOUNDARY_8a1ab58_1078363725-- - * Unsubscribing? Mail majordomo@roughdraft.org with the message * UNSUBSCRIBE BANANAFISH From oconnort@panix.com Wed Mar 3 21:25:21 2004 Received: by dont.panix.com (8.11.6p2-a/8.8.8/PanixLC1.7) id i242PLe22530 for bananafish-outgoing; Wed, 3 Mar 2004 21:25:21 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <20040304005502.12780.qmail@web60908.mail.yahoo.com> Date: Wed, 3 Mar 2004 16:55:02 -0800 (PST) From: City Cabin Subject: Re: Holden and Death To: bananafish@roughdraft.org In-Reply-To: <002301c40178$3cb93310$0101a8c0@Monster> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Sender: owner-bananafish@roughdraft.org Precedence: bulk Reply-To: bananafish@roughdraft.org --- Kenneth wrote: > Secondly, the New > Yorker people badgered Salinger to write a major > work about the war for > years after 45 and after 52. While he repeatedly > remarked about considering > the possibility, in the end, he decided not to. Would you quote sources? Thanks. --Bruce __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Search - Find what you’re looking for faster http://search.yahoo.com - * Unsubscribing? Mail majordomo@roughdraft.org with the message * UNSUBSCRIBE BANANAFISH From oconnort@panix.com Wed Mar 3 21:25:20 2004 Received: from localhost (localhost [[UNIX: localhost]]) by dont.panix.com (8.11.6p2-a/8.8.8/PanixLC1.7) id i242PKt22527 for bananafish-outgoing; Wed, 3 Mar 2004 21:25:20 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <20040304004438.35437.qmail@web60905.mail.yahoo.com> Date: Wed, 3 Mar 2004 16:44:38 -0800 (PST) From: City Cabin Subject: RE: Holden and Death To: bananafish@roughdraft.org In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Sender: owner-bananafish@roughdraft.org Precedence: bulk Reply-To: bananafish@roughdraft.org --- Robin Dudley wrote: > I think Catcher is a war story, that > Holden is a surrogate > soldier telling a war story without ever having to > mention the Hurtgen > Forest or Jeeps or gas masks. At the end of 1945, in a Contributors' Note, Salinger wrote: "So far the novels of this war have had too much of the strength, maturity and craftsmanship critics are looking for, and too little of the glorious imperfections which teeter and fall off the best minds. The men who have been in this war deserve some sort of trembling melody rendered without embarrassment or regret. I'll watch out for that book." In my opinion, the closest Salinger got to this was the already-published suite of stories with Vincent Caulfield and Babe Gladwaller: Last Day of the Last Furlough, A Boy in France, This Sandwich Has No Mayonanaise, and The Stranger. I don't think of the Holden of Catcher (as opposed to Vincent's brother Holden) as a surrogate soldier. I barely think of Catcher as a post WWII novel. The date seems unspecified, apart from the reference to the atomic bomb (the next one Holden will ride), and that movie which Holden goes on about attacking the plot. The Catcher almost seems a retreat by Salinger to life before the war. That the war experience was too much for him to render in a novel. (It is only with For Esme and tangentially the Glass Stories does Salinger deal with the war and its effects.) I agree, though, that Holden is death obsessed, especially starting with Allie's. I would say Salinger himself is obsessed with sibling death. Why, I wonder? Perhaps our supposedly cold-hearted recluse was moved beyond words by the death he witnessed in WWII, and the only commensurate way he could convey it after the war was to fill his fictions with the deaths of beloved siblings. Ah, in a sense I've come round to Robin's idea of surrogate. Thanks, Robin, for the interesting post. --Bruce __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Search - Find what you’re looking for faster http://search.yahoo.com - * Unsubscribing? Mail majordomo@roughdraft.org with the message * UNSUBSCRIBE BANANAFISH From oconnort@panix.com Wed Mar 3 21:25:21 2004 Received: from localhost (localhost [[UNIX: localhost]]) by dont.panix.com (8.11.6p2-a/8.8.8/PanixLC1.7) id i242PLL22540 for bananafish-outgoing; Wed, 3 Mar 2004 21:25:21 -0500 (EST) Subject: Fw: Re: In Defense of the Associate Professor From: "James J. Rovira" To: bananafish@roughdraft.org Date: Wed, 03 Mar 2004 20:36:34 -0500 X-Mailer: NetMail ModWeb Module X-Sender: jrovira MIME-Version: 1.0 Message-ID: <1078364194.8a1ab58jrovira@drew.edu> Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="------=_ModWebBOUNDARY_8a1ab58_1078364194" Sender: owner-bananafish@roughdraft.org Precedence: bulk Reply-To: bananafish@roughdraft.org This is a multi-part message in MIME format. --------=_ModWebBOUNDARY_8a1ab58_1078364194 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Robbie -- I agree with your memory of the events leading to Will's leaving the list. = However, I don't think he saw a distinction between the use of words offe= nsive to him and ridicule or pejorative, though. I think that's the fund= amental difference in point of view between he and Scottie, by the way. Scottie, if I remember, had written a rather sentimental post about Christm= as, describing how the season made him feel, and said something to the ef= fect that atheists and (insert word for Jews here) just need to get over = it. What i said at the time was that Scottie was including himself in th= e category of people that need to just relax about the Christmas hype and= allow themselves to get in the spirit of the season, so probably didn't = consider what was said about others as being necessarily offensive. You know, of course, that a member of a group using a word to describe the = group, as opposed to a non-member, are completely different beasts, right= ? Jim --------=_ModWebBOUNDARY_8a1ab58_1078364194 Content-Type: message/rfc822; name="Re: In Defense of the Associate Professor.eml" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Content-Disposition: inline X-Auth-No: Return-Path: Received: from smtppub.drew.edu not authenticated [192.107.39.205] by drew.edu with NetMail SMTP Agent $Revision: 3.44 $ on Linux; Wed, 03 Mar 2004 19:17:12 -0500 Received: from localhost (smtppub.drew.edu [192.107.39.205]) by smtppub.drew.edu (Postfix) with ESMTP id 26EAF1241D0 for ; Wed, 3 Mar 2004 19:17:12 -0500 (EST) Received: from smtppub.drew.edu ([192.107.39.205]) by localhost (paperboy.drew.edu [192.107.39.205]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 02544-03 for ; Wed, 3 Mar 2004 19:17:12 -0500 (EST) Received: from mail3.panix.com (mail3.panix.com [166.84.1.74]) by smtppub.drew.edu (Postfix) with ESMTP id AA7EE1241F8 for ; Wed, 3 Mar 2004 19:17:11 -0500 (EST) Received: from dont.panix.com (dont.panix.com [166.84.0.211]) by mail3.panix.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 52CC198E9C; Wed, 3 Mar 2004 19:15:38 -0500 (EST) Received: by dont.panix.com (8.11.6p2-a/8.8.8/PanixLC1.7) id i240EsG16972 for bananafish-outgoing; Wed, 3 Mar 2004 19:14:54 -0500 (EST) X-Originating-IP: [63.167.237.65] X-Originating-Email: [lmanningvines@hotmail.com] X-Sender: lmanningvines@hotmail.com From: "L. Manning Vines" To: Subject: Re: In Defense of the Associate Professor Date: Wed, 3 Mar 2004 16:51:53 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1158 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1165 Message-ID: X-OriginalArrivalTime: 03 Mar 2004 21:51:55.0697 (UTC) FILETIME=[BEC4AA10:01C40169] Sender: owner-bananafish@roughdraft.org Precedence: bulk Reply-To: bananafish@roughdraft.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.1 tagged_above=0.0 required=10.0 tests=FORGED_HOTMAIL_RCVD2 X-Spam-Level: Tim writes, hypothetically, that some people who are ridiculed on the list might leave, deciding that they can live without the unpleasantness, and the rest of us are thus deprived. I don't doubt that this is true, but I have a vague and uncertain suspicion that this statement might be only somewhat hypothetical -- and somewhat built to fit the model of this thread's eponymous educator. In case this suspicion is correct, I am compelled to say something in Scottie's defense, since, contrary to what virtually everybody said at the time (including Will himself), at least in the final posts, this is not quite what happened. Though there may have been a long history of ridicule (of various degrees of sophistication or gentleness), the post that finally drove Will to suggest (hypothetical) physical violence and to leave the list -- when I, at least, had never witnessed such a reaction from him on this list before -- contained no ridicule at all. What it contained was several archaic ethnic epithets, one of which Will referred to, incorrectly, as though it were directed at him (and which, incidentally, is the perfectly ordinary Yiddish word for Jew). It should be added, because it does make it a difference to some people, that Scottie used the epithets with reference to old friends and clearly not as pejoratives. Perhaps old teasing got to Will and he reached his breaking point when he heard that word (whatever its context). But it seems important to me that he left not directly subsequent to ridicule but directly subsequent to a word that was very offensive to him, and I fear that suggesting otherwise is unfair to Scottie. -Robbie - * Unsubscribing? Mail majordomo@roughdraft.org with the message * UNSUBSCRIBE BANANAFISH --------=_ModWebBOUNDARY_8a1ab58_1078364194-- - * Unsubscribing? Mail majordomo@roughdraft.org with the message * UNSUBSCRIBE BANANAFISH From oconnort@panix.com Wed Mar 3 22:43:47 2004 Received: from localhost (localhost [[UNIX: localhost]]) by dont.panix.com (8.11.6p2-a/8.8.8/PanixLC1.7) id i243hlT25382 for bananafish-outgoing; Wed, 3 Mar 2004 22:43:47 -0500 (EST) From: "Tim O'Connor" To: bananafish Subject: Re: In Defense of the Associate Professor Date: Wed, 3 Mar 2004 22:41:25 -0500 Message-Id: <20040304034125.31514@mail.panix.com> In-Reply-To: References: X-Mailer: CTM PowerMail 4.2.1 us Carbon MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-bananafish@roughdraft.org Precedence: bulk Reply-To: bananafish@roughdraft.org On Wed, Mar 3, 2004, lmanningvines@hotmail.com said: >Tim writes, hypothetically, that some people who are ridiculed on the list >might leave, deciding that they can live without the unpleasantness, and the >rest of us are thus deprived. It's good to engage you in discussion, Robbie ... I feel as if it keeps us honest. Two things I will mention, then I won't belabor it. One is that as the list manager, I am from time to time asked (in a sense) to play the role of father-confessor. It's not something I much care to do (unless I've established a friendship with the person, in which case I am always happy to be a sounding board), but if people want to "talk," I listen, and I listen carefully. So, there have been a number of people who have quit the list and, for their own reasons, have felt the need to explain why, and then I hear about the way people feel about the back-and-forth and how they were treated. But that is what it is, and I have no business being a mother hen about it. Talk, talk, more talk: this is what we value (constitutionally, in the US of A; philosophically, in bananafish). If you have something to contribute to the dialogue, speak up. Everyone's a newbie at some point. Just jump in and speak. (But don't ask where the ducks go in the winter, because we are still wondering about that.) Number two is more difficult to approach and pin down, but I will try. Sometimes people are upset about negative messages or what they perceive as personal attacks. What I have tried to say to the offended, in my own uncertain way, is that these things happen, and we all have to learn to stand up on our own. If you can't take the stiletto of Scottie's comments, or the blunt- instrument of Daniel's, and on and on, then you have a difficulty that goes beyond the confines of this list. It's not that I am without sympathy; it's that I really am not able to help, in any part of the spectrum that constitutes "help." I'm not interested in being part of a discussion (and I think of the bananafish threads as ongoing discussion) that has been Disney-fied. Opinions flare up. Comments do, too. And emotions. You have to stand up for yourself, not cry "woe is me." At the moment, a bit feverish, I cannot recall my beloved Supreme Court justice (Brandeis? Frankfurter?), who said that the answer to hate speech is MORE speech. That is, don't try to forbid your opponent from speaking, but speak up against them yourself. And for the record, I should rush to say that in general, although things can sometimes be annoying, there has really been little that could be labeled "hate speech" here. I just want to make that clear. That said, I genuinely feel that we don't need personal attacks. If you want to carry out a personal vendetta, take it to private mail. Don't engage in pointless venom here. It makes for a hostile place for most everyone, and it doesn't help the "ongoing discussion" that I like to have occur. (You can of course argue about what the hell it matters about what *I* like to occur ... I admit that it's kind of arbitrary, but that I try to be fair about anything I say when I step in.) I suppose that an academic model may be close to what I imagine. No harassment, no personal attacks, no pointless vitriol. It's very hard to define. (If you have time to read something new and are looking for sensible discussion of this topic, let me recommend a book by a friend, called CYBERVILLE, by Stacy Horn. It is about the creation, formation, and nurturing of online communities. I admit that I am probably biased, but I liked it and I found that much of it related in some way to what happens on this list.) Finally, I will end this thought by saying that it is not just Will (who is a good friend and a fine, kindred spirit) I miss, but at least two others who felt that they were under assault. I tried to convince the two latter people that it wasn't directed at them personally, and that they had to grow a thicker skin, but in the end, both left. And it was a loss to us all. But even then, you know, if I had to choose between some kind of lobotomized Happy-Land or one of Eugene O'Neill's blood-and-guts saloons, I'd probably choose the latter, because at least there is the possibility of evolution in the saloon, while the lobotomized don't get very far in the long run. Whether these comments leave things clearer, I defer that decision to you, dear reader. I'm not stupid or naive enough to think that we're all going to comport ourselves with silly grins on our faces, but at the same time I find myself hoping that we can avoid personal nastiness. For instance, if you have a visceral reaction to this message, pick it apart and tell us why I'm wrong; I don't mind. I've developed calluses upon calluses by this point. On the other hand, if all you have to say to me is something like, "don't be an asshole" or something along those lines, give me a break. If I want that kind of discourse, I will go over to the basketball courts on Sixth Avenue and provoke an argument. Now that I think of it, there are a couple of fine people in the crowd at the basketball courts from whom we could all learn a lot about verbal put-downs! (It is probably the premier spot in the city to watch b-ball or, if you play, to enter into the sports equivalent of going onstage at the Apollo Theater on talent night. The place has appeared in a million- and-one advertisements.) Thanks for listening, assuming you lasted this long! --tim - * Unsubscribing? Mail majordomo@roughdraft.org with the message * UNSUBSCRIBE BANANAFISH From oconnort@panix.com Wed Mar 3 22:43:46 2004 Received: from localhost (localhost [[UNIX: localhost]]) by dont.panix.com (8.11.6p2-a/8.8.8/PanixLC1.7) id i243hkg25377 for bananafish-outgoing; Wed, 3 Mar 2004 22:43:46 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <20040304030712.68445.qmail@web14006.mail.yahoo.com> Date: Wed, 3 Mar 2004 19:07:12 -0800 (PST) From: Cecilia Baader Subject: Re: Spastic Update To: bananafish@roughdraft.org In-Reply-To: <20040303032822.3736@mail.panix.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Sender: owner-bananafish@roughdraft.org Precedence: bulk Reply-To: bananafish@roughdraft.org --- Tim O'Connor wrote: > Best to all as March begins. Here in NY it was a day to break your > heart, warm enough to wear only a light jacket and no hat and real > shoes. Indeed. It's the sort of day that reminds you that it's always possible to get through the winter if there are days like these sitting along the other side. Thank you for looking after us, O Tim. You know, last night I was watching a clip from Monty Python's Holy Grail. Toward the end, Arthur and his knights come across a wizard who is standing on a mountainside shooting flame for seemingly no other reason than it seems fun. And suddenly I'm overwhelmed with a picture of our own wizard Tim, pointing his staff at that pesky spammer (spam spam spam spam), annhilating it in a most joyous manner. Pow. And also, did I mention that it is spring? Best, Cecilia. __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Search - Find what you’re looking for faster http://search.yahoo.com - * Unsubscribing? Mail majordomo@roughdraft.org with the message * UNSUBSCRIBE BANANAFISH From oconnort@panix.com Wed Mar 3 23:20:25 2004 Received: from localhost (localhost [[UNIX: localhost]]) by dont.panix.com (8.11.6p2-a/8.8.8/PanixLC1.7) id i244KPh26780 for bananafish-outgoing; Wed, 3 Mar 2004 23:20:25 -0500 (EST) From: "Tim O'Connor" To: bananafish Subject: Re: Spastic Update Date: Wed, 3 Mar 2004 23:19:33 -0500 Message-Id: <20040304041933.16595@mail.panix.com> In-Reply-To: <20040304030712.68445.qmail@web14006.mail.yahoo.com> References: <20040304030712.68445.qmail@web14006.mail.yahoo.com> X-Mailer: CTM PowerMail 4.2.1 us Carbon MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-bananafish@roughdraft.org Precedence: bulk Reply-To: bananafish@roughdraft.org On Wed, Mar 3, 2004, ceciliabaader@yahoo.com said: >Indeed. It's the sort of day that reminds you that it's always possible >to get through the winter if there are days like these sitting along the >other side. Yes ... why didn't we play hooky today and investigate the ducks in Central Park? Today would have been a glorious day for it. >And suddenly I'm overwhelmed with a picture of our own wizard Tim, >pointing his staff at that pesky spammer (spam spam spam spam), >annhilating it in a most joyous manner. I'm taking a special antidepressant that specifically targets the spam receptors (on port 25) in the brain. Let's see how it works. >And also, did I mention that it is spring? I know this weather won't last, but isn't it pretty to think so? --tim - * Unsubscribing? Mail majordomo@roughdraft.org with the message * UNSUBSCRIBE BANANAFISH From oconnort@panix.com Thu Mar 4 00:38:05 2004 Received: from localhost (localhost [[UNIX: localhost]]) by dont.panix.com (8.11.6p2-a/8.8.8/PanixLC1.7) id i245c5501071 for bananafish-outgoing; Thu, 4 Mar 2004 00:38:05 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <001001c401a1$cbc42b90$0101a8c0@Monster> From: "Kenneth" To: References: <20040304005502.12780.qmail@web60908.mail.yahoo.com> Subject: Re: Holden and Death Date: Wed, 3 Mar 2004 23:33:08 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1158 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1165 X-Authentication-Info: Submitted using SMTP AUTH at out002.verizon.net from [141.153.183.93] at Wed, 3 Mar 2004 22:33:07 -0600 Sender: owner-bananafish@roughdraft.org Precedence: bulk Reply-To: bananafish@roughdraft.org Hamilton. JD Salinger: A Writing Life Whit Burnett to Salinger, April 14, 1944: "Perhaps the first third of the book could be stories of young people on the eve of war; the middle third in and around the army, and then one or two stories at the close of war." Salinger's reply was cautious [Hamilton] Hamilton writes of 1945: It would have been hard to ressurrect the schoolboy sensibilities of Holden at a time like this. And yet, he shrank from the idea of a "war novel": "So far the novels of this war have been too much of the strength, maturity and craftsmanship critics are looking for, and too little of the glorious imperfections which teeter and fall off the best minds." (the rest of this quote is in another post - and I hate to type) By 1946 Salinger writes Hemingway (presumably from the Nuremburg Trials) that he is indeed ressurrecting Holden Caulfield. If Hamilton is to be taken as a source (a debatable assertion) by 1951, "It had taken him five years to get to the point where he could decently honor his original pre-Europe pledge of silence. ["Furlough"] He would never again write directly about war." Now, you all know the chronology. Salinger started Catcher before the war. During the war he largely put it down. Far from being analogous of eachother, the two subjects conflicted. After (and when he'd dealt with) the war he went back to Catcher. I don't think that this inclination appears before the letter to Hemingway. Bottom line: it was one or the other, Catcher or a book (novel or short stories) involving the war. Burnett (sorry I said New Yorker before) and Salinger went back and forth on this for quite a while. After Catcher, in 1952, the British wanted to produce for Esme, either radio or stage. Salinger declined. Sorry I didn't dredge up and pour over sources any more than this. But you people all know this stuff and frankly, this is an e-mail, not a research paper. I love Catcher because it is so left to interpretation, allowing it to be personalized and intimate. But some directions are so askew as to be distractions to the beauty of the book's intention. ----- Original Message ----- From: "City Cabin" To: Sent: Wednesday, March 03, 2004 7:55 PM Subject: Re: Holden and Death > > --- Kenneth wrote: > > Secondly, the New > > Yorker people badgered Salinger to write a major > > work about the war for > > years after 45 and after 52. While he repeatedly > > remarked about considering > > the possibility, in the end, he decided not to. > > > Would you quote sources? > > Thanks. > > --Bruce > > > > > __________________________________ > Do you Yahoo!? > Yahoo! Search - Find what you're looking for faster > http://search.yahoo.com > - > * Unsubscribing? Mail majordomo@roughdraft.org with the message > * UNSUBSCRIBE BANANAFISH > - * Unsubscribing? Mail majordomo@roughdraft.org with the message * UNSUBSCRIBE BANANAFISH From oconnort@panix.com Thu Mar 4 11:25:21 2004 Received: from localhost (localhost [[UNIX: localhost]]) by dont.panix.com (8.11.6p2-a/8.8.8/PanixLC1.7) id i24GPLq25233 for bananafish-outgoing; Thu, 4 Mar 2004 11:25:21 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <20040304154250.9053.qmail@web13907.mail.yahoo.com> Date: Thu, 4 Mar 2004 07:42:50 -0800 (PST) From: David Johnson Subject: Re: Holden and Death To: bananafish@roughdraft.org In-Reply-To: <001001c401a1$cbc42b90$0101a8c0@Monster> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="0-625075363-1078414970=:6305" Sender: owner-bananafish@roughdraft.org Precedence: bulk Reply-To: bananafish@roughdraft.org --0-625075363-1078414970=:6305 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Even more tantalizing is the story (did Bruce post this?) about Salinger telling people in the 1970s that he had indeed completed a novel about WWII. This appeared in a gossip column in 1971 (sorry, can't remember the source immediately) and another poster indicated that Salinger mentioned it at his NYC detective friend's retirement party in 1978 (said friend was a war buddy of JDS, I think). David J. Kenneth wrote: Hamilton. JD Salinger: A Writing Life Whit Burnett to Salinger, April 14, 1944: "Perhaps the first third of the book could be stories of young people on the eve of war; the middle third in and around the army, and then one or two stories at the close of war." Salinger's reply was cautious [Hamilton] Hamilton writes of 1945: It would have been hard to ressurrect the schoolboy sensibilities of Holden at a time like this. And yet, he shrank from the idea of a "war novel": "So far the novels of this war have been too much of the strength, maturity and craftsmanship critics are looking for, and too little of the glorious imperfections which teeter and fall off the best minds." (the rest of this quote is in another post - and I hate to type) By 1946 Salinger writes Hemingway (presumably from the Nuremburg Trials) that he is indeed ressurrecting Holden Caulfield. If Hamilton is to be taken as a source (a debatable assertion) by 1951, "It had taken him five years to get to the point where he could decently honor his original pre-Europe pledge of silence. ["Furlough"] He would never again write directly about war." Now, you all know the chronology. Salinger started Catcher before the war. During the war he largely put it down. Far from being analogous of eachother, the two subjects conflicted. After (and when he'd dealt with) the war he went back to Catcher. I don't think that this inclination appears before the letter to Hemingway. Bottom line: it was one or the other, Catcher or a book (novel or short stories) involving the war. Burnett (sorry I said New Yorker before) and Salinger went back and forth on this for quite a while. After Catcher, in 1952, the British wanted to produce for Esme, either radio or stage. Salinger declined. Sorry I didn't dredge up and pour over sources any more than this. But you people all know this stuff and frankly, this is an e-mail, not a research paper. I love Catcher because it is so left to interpretation, allowing it to be personalized and intimate. But some directions are so askew as to be distractions to the beauty of the book's intention. ----- Original Message ----- From: "City Cabin" To: Sent: Wednesday, March 03, 2004 7:55 PM Subject: Re: Holden and Death > > --- Kenneth wrote: > > Secondly, the New > > Yorker people badgered Salinger to write a major > > work about the war for > > years after 45 and after 52. While he repeatedly > > remarked about considering > > the possibility, in the end, he decided not to. > > > Would you quote sources? > > Thanks. > > --Bruce > > > > > __________________________________ > Do you Yahoo!? > Yahoo! Search - Find what you're looking for faster > http://search.yahoo.com > - > * Unsubscribing? Mail majordomo@roughdraft.org with the message > * UNSUBSCRIBE BANANAFISH > - * Unsubscribing? Mail majordomo@roughdraft.org with the message * UNSUBSCRIBE BANANAFISH --------------------------------- Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Search - Find what you’re looking for faster. --0-625075363-1078414970=:6305 Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii
Even more tantalizing is the story (did Bruce post this?) about Salinger telling people in the 1970s that he had indeed completed a novel about WWII.  This appeared in a gossip column in 1971 (sorry, can't remember the source immediately) and another poster indicated that Salinger mentioned it at his NYC detective friend's retirement party in 1978 (said friend was a war buddy of JDS, I think).
David J.

Kenneth <kenny2@verizon.net> wrote:

Hamilton. JD Salinger: A Writing Life

Whit Burnett to Salinger, April 14, 1944:
"Perhaps the first third of the book could be stories of young people on the
eve of war; the middle third in and around the army, and then one or two
stories at the close of war."
Salinger's reply was cautious [Hamilton]

Hamilton writes of 1945:
It would have been hard to ressurrect the schoolboy sensibilities of Holden
at a time like this. And yet, he shrank from the idea of a "war novel":
"So far the novels of this war have been too much of the strength, maturity
and craftsmanship critics are looking for, and too little of the glorious
imperfections which teeter and fall off the best minds." (the rest of this
quote is in another post - and I hate to type)

By 1946 Salinger writes Hemingway (presumably from the Nuremburg Trials)
that he is i ndeed ressurrecting Holden Caulfield.

If Hamilton is to be taken as a source (a debatable assertion) by 1951, "It
had taken him five years to get to the point where he could decently honor
his original pre-Europe pledge of silence. ["Furlough"] He would never again
write directly about war."

Now, you all know the chronology. Salinger started Catcher before the war.
During the war he largely put it down. Far from being analogous of
eachother, the two subjects conflicted. After (and when he'd dealt with) the
war he went back to Catcher. I don't think that this inclination appears
before the letter to Hemingway. Bottom line: it was one or the other,
Catcher or a book (novel or short stories) involving the war. Burnett (sorry
I said New Yorker before) and Salinger went back and forth on this for quite
a while. After Catcher, in 1952, the British wanted to produce for Esme,
either radio or stage. Salinger declined.
Sorry I didn't dredge up and pour over sources any more than this. But you
people all know this stuff and frankly, this is an e-mail, not a research
paper.
I love Catcher because it is so left to interpretation, allowing it to be
personalized and intimate. But some directions are so askew as to be
distractions to the beauty of the book's intention.







----- Original Message -----
From: "City Cabin"
To:
Sent: Wednesday, March 03, 2004 7:55 PM
Subject: Re: Holden and Death


>
> --- Kenneth wrote:
> > Secondly, the New
> > Yorker people badgered Salinger to write a major
> > work about the war for
> > years after 45 and after 52. While he repeatedly
> > remarked about considering
> > the possibility, in the end, he decided not to.
>
>
> Would you quote sources?
>
> Thanks.
>> --Bruce
>
>
>
>
> __________________________________
> Do you Yahoo!?
> Yahoo! Search - Find what you're looking for faster
> http://search.yahoo.com
> -
> * Unsubscribing? Mail majordomo@roughdraft.org with the message
> * UNSUBSCRIBE BANANAFISH
>

-
* Unsubscribing? Mail majordomo@roughdraft.org with the message
* UNSUBSCRIBE BANANAFISH

Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Search - Find what you’re looking for faster. --0-625075363-1078414970=:6305-- - * Unsubscribing? Mail majordomo@roughdraft.org with the message * UNSUBSCRIBE BANANAFISH From oconnort@panix.com Thu Mar 4 11:25:20 2004 Received: from localhost (localhost [[UNIX: localhost]]) by dont.panix.com (8.11.6p2-a/8.8.8/PanixLC1.7) id i24GPK025227 for bananafish-outgoing; Thu, 4 Mar 2004 11:25:20 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <40473FF0.6020200@drew.edu> Date: Thu, 04 Mar 2004 09:40:48 -0500 From: James Rovira User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.3) Gecko/20030312 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: bananafish@roughdraft.org Subject: Re: Holden and Death References: <40462DC5.ADC2.F4D9.000*/c=us/admd=/prmd=or.gov/o=HR/ou=gwise/s=Anello/g=Michael/i=J/@MHS> <002301c40178$3cb93310$0101a8c0@Monster> In-Reply-To: <002301c40178$3cb93310$0101a8c0@Monster> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-bananafish@roughdraft.org Precedence: bulk Reply-To: bananafish@roughdraft.org I see the point of these critiques of Pinkser's ideas, but I think it's too dependent upon intentionality. Authors can map their feelings as well as their ideas onto their work, and Pinsker's kind of criticism seems to be exploring Catcher's emotional landscape rather than ideological. So what Salinger -thought- about the war may have been somewhat different from what he -felt- about it. What I would dislike about the Pinsker would be its treatment of literature as a kind of "secret code" of sorts ("Hold-in" "Caul-field"), which is more a revelation of the ingenuity of the critic than the work itself. But I find it hard to argue with Pinsker about Salinger's obsession with death or, more precisely (thanks to Bruce), the dead sibling. That's the driving force behind the Glass family stories. The Dead Seymour hovers over the entire family. Jim Kenneth wrote: >This one's outta the ballpark. And Mike, you know better. Apart from Allie's >(belatedly inserted) name, there's no correlation between Cartcher and the >war. First off, it was largely written during the war. Secondly, the New >Yorker people badgered Salinger to write a major work about the war for >years after 45 and after 52. While he repeatedly remarked about considering >the possibility, in the end, he decided not to. Had he done so already, by >way of Catcher, wouldn't he have mentioned it? > - * Unsubscribing? Mail majordomo@roughdraft.org with the message * UNSUBSCRIBE BANANAFISH From oconnort@panix.com Thu Mar 4 11:25:21 2004 Received: from localhost (localhost [[UNIX: localhost]]) by dont.panix.com (8.11.6p2-a/8.8.8/PanixLC1.7) id i24GPLD25238 for bananafish-outgoing; Thu, 4 Mar 2004 11:25:21 -0500 (EST) X400-Received: by mta Salem-MTA1 in /c=US/admd= /prmd=or.gov/; Relayed; 04 Mar 2004 08:21:35 -0800 X400-Received: by /c=US/admd= /prmd=or.gov/; Relayed; 04 Mar 2004 08:21:35 -0800 X400-MTS-Identifier: [/c=US/admd= /prmd=or.gov/; 40475784.ADC2.0809.000] Content-Identifier: 02BC14047578F001 Content-Return: Allowed X400-Content-Type: P2-1988 ( 22 ) Conversion: Allowed Original-Encoded-Information-Types: IA5-Text Disclose-Recipients: Prohibited Alternate-Recipient: Allowed X400-Originator: Michael.J.Anello@state.or.us X400-Recipients: non-disclosure; Message-Id: <40475784.ADC2.0809.000*/c=us/admd=/prmd=or.gov/o=HR/ou=gwise/s=Anello/g=Michael/i=J/@MHS> Date: 04 Mar 2004 08:21:35 -0800 From: ANELLO Michael J To: bananafish@roughdraft.org, lmanningvines@hotmail.com Subject: Re: In Defense of the Associate Professor Sender: owner-bananafish@roughdraft.org Precedence: bulk Reply-To: bananafish@roughdraft.org To Everyone and Anyone, Even Me: Welcome to the kitchen. Is it too hot in here for you? Would you like some cry fries with your wah-burger? -Mike >>> lmanningvines@hotmail.com 03/03/04 04:15PM >>> Tim writes, hypothetically, that some people who are ridiculed on the list might leave, deciding that they can live without the unpleasantness, and the rest of us are thus deprived. I don't doubt that this is true, but I have a vague and uncertain suspicion that this statement might be only somewhat hypothetical -- and somewhat built to fit the model of this thread's eponymous educator. In case this suspicion is correct, I am compelled to say something in Scottie's defense, since, contrary to what virtually everybody said at the time (including Will himself), at least in the final posts, this is not quite what happened. Though there may have been a long history of ridicule (of various degrees of sophistication or gentleness), the post that finally drove Will to suggest (hypothetical) physical violence and to leave the list -- when I, at least, had never witnessed such a reaction from him on this list before -- contained no ridicule at all. What it contained was several archaic ethnic epithets, one of which Will referred to, incorrectly, as though it were directed at him (and which, incidentally, is the perfectly ordinary Yiddish word for Jew). It should be added, because it does make it a difference to some people, that Scottie used the epithets with reference to old friends and clearly not as pejoratives. Perhaps old teasing got to Will and he reached his breaking point when he heard that word (whatever its context). But it seems important to me that he left not directly subsequent to ridicule but directly subsequent to a word that was very offensive to him, and I fear that suggesting otherwise is unfair to Scottie. -Robbie - * Unsubscribing? Mail majordomo@roughdraft.org with the message * UNSUBSCRIBE BANANAFISH - * Unsubscribing? Mail majordomo@roughdraft.org with the message * UNSUBSCRIBE BANANAFISH From oconnort@panix.com Thu Mar 4 14:44:33 2004 Received: from localhost (localhost [[UNIX: localhost]]) by dont.panix.com (8.11.6p2-a/8.8.8/PanixLC1.7) id i24JiX107729 for bananafish-outgoing; Thu, 4 Mar 2004 14:44:33 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <003901c4020a$95bff3d0$0101a8c0@Monster> From: "Kenneth" To: References: <40462DC5.ADC2.F4D9.000*/c=us/admd=/prmd=or.gov/o=HR/ou=gwise/s=Anello/g=Michael/i=J/@MHS> <002301c40178$3cb93310$0101a8c0@Monster> <40473FF0.6020200@drew.edu> Subject: Re: Holden and Death Date: Thu, 4 Mar 2004 12:03:14 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1158 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1165 X-Authentication-Info: Submitted using SMTP AUTH at out008.verizon.net from [141.153.148.190] at Thu, 4 Mar 2004 11:03:11 -0600 Sender: owner-bananafish@roughdraft.org Precedence: bulk Reply-To: bananafish@roughdraft.org I suppose you can take a completely deconstructionist view of Catcher regarding the war. The problem is that great chunks of the novel remain unaltered from before and during his service. If there is a war message there, even subliminally, you'd think that he would have written with a frenzy immediately after the war while thoughts or "feelings" were freshest and most compelling. Instead, he stopped writing (at least Catcher) at this time as if to first cleanse or readjust himself in order to continue the work. In fact, any reference to the war in Catcher appears to have been added in very late and quite intentionally. There are a handful of portions which are obviously added or altered for one reason or another and are easy to discern. This is one of them. I've also read "professional analysis" of Catcher that accuses Holden of incestual feelings toward Phoebe. It's one thing to read this kind of stuff for amusement, it's another to let it impact your own perceptions. ----- Original Message ----- From: "James Rovira" To: Sent: Thursday, March 04, 2004 9:40 AM Subject: Re: Holden and Death > I see the point of these critiques of Pinkser's ideas, but I think it's > too dependent upon intentionality. Authors can map their feelings as > well as their ideas onto their work, and Pinsker's kind of criticism > seems to be exploring Catcher's emotional landscape rather than > ideological. > > So what Salinger -thought- about the war may have been somewhat > different from what he -felt- about it. > > What I would dislike about the Pinsker would be its treatment of > literature as a kind of "secret code" of sorts ("Hold-in" "Caul-field"), > which is more a revelation of the ingenuity of the critic than the work > itself. But I find it hard to argue with Pinsker about Salinger's > obsession with death or, more precisely (thanks to Bruce), the dead > sibling. That's the driving force behind the Glass family stories. > The Dead Seymour hovers over the entire family. > > Jim > > Kenneth wrote: > > >This one's outta the ballpark. And Mike, you know better. Apart from Allie's > >(belatedly inserted) name, there's no correlation between Cartcher and the > >war. First off, it was largely written during the war. Secondly, the New > >Yorker people badgered Salinger to write a major work about the war for > >years after 45 and after 52. While he repeatedly remarked about considering > >the possibility, in the end, he decided not to. Had he done so already, by > >way of Catcher, wouldn't he have mentioned it? > > > > - > * Unsubscribing? Mail majordomo@roughdraft.org with the message > * UNSUBSCRIBE BANANAFISH > - * Unsubscribing? Mail majordomo@roughdraft.org with the message * UNSUBSCRIBE BANANAFISH From oconnort@panix.com Thu Mar 4 14:44:33 2004 Received: from localhost (localhost [[UNIX: localhost]]) by dont.panix.com (8.11.6p2-a/8.8.8/PanixLC1.7) id i24JiXI07733 for bananafish-outgoing; Thu, 4 Mar 2004 14:44:33 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <20040304172911.72004.qmail@web13901.mail.yahoo.com> Date: Thu, 4 Mar 2004 09:29:11 -0800 (PST) From: David Johnson Subject: Re: Holden and Death To: bananafish@roughdraft.org In-Reply-To: <40473FF0.6020200@drew.edu> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="0-2075032434-1078421351=:71906" Sender: owner-bananafish@roughdraft.org Precedence: bulk Reply-To: bananafish@roughdraft.org --0-2075032434-1078421351=:71906 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Then there's also the mystery of Salinger's adolescent friend who died, alluded to in the Time story... I don't think I've ever seen this elaborated upon anywhere. James Rovira wrote:I see the point of these critiques of Pinkser's ideas, but I think it's too dependent upon intentionality. Authors can map their feelings as well as their ideas onto their work, and Pinsker's kind of criticism seems to be exploring Catcher's emotional landscape rather than ideological. So what Salinger -thought- about the war may have been somewhat different from what he -felt- about it. What I would dislike about the Pinsker would be its treatment of literature as a kind of "secret code" of sorts ("Hold-in" "Caul-field"), which is more a revelation of the ingenuity of the critic than the work itself. But I find it hard to argue with Pinsker about Salinger's obsession with death or, more precisely (thanks to Bruce), the dead sibling. That's the driving force behind the Glass family stories. The Dead Seymour hovers over the entire family. Jim Kenneth wrote: >This one's outta the ballpark. And Mike, you know better. Apart from Allie's >(belatedly inserted) name, there's no correlation between Cartcher and the >war. First off, it was largely written during the war. Secondly, the New >Yorker people badgered Salinger to write a major work about the war for >years after 45 and after 52. While he repeatedly remarked about considering >the possibility, in the end, he decided not to. Had he done so already, by >way of Catcher, wouldn't he have mentioned it? > - * Unsubscribing? Mail majordomo@roughdraft.org with the message * UNSUBSCRIBE BANANAFISH --------------------------------- Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Search - Find what you’re looking for faster. --0-2075032434-1078421351=:71906 Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii
Then there's also the mystery of Salinger's adolescent friend who died, alluded to in the Time story... I don't think I've ever seen this elaborated upon anywhere.

James Rovira <jrovira@drew.edu> wrote:
I see the point of these critiques of Pinkser's ideas, but I think it's
too dependent upon intentionality. Authors can map their feelings as
well as their ideas onto their work, and Pinsker's kind of criticism
seems to be exploring Catcher's emotional landscape rather than
ideological.

So what Salinger -thought- about the war may have been somewhat
different from what he -felt- about it.

What I would dislike about the Pinsker would be its treatment of
literature as a kind of "secret code" of sorts ("Hold-in" "Caul-field"),
which is more a revelation of the ingenuity of the critic than the work
itself. But I find it hard to argue with Pinsker about Salinger's
obsession with death or, more precisely (thanks to Bruce), the dead
sibling. That's the driving force behind the Glass family stories.
The Dead Seymour hovers ove r the entire family.

Jim

Kenneth wrote:

>This one's outta the ballpark. And Mike, you know better. Apart from Allie's
>(belatedly inserted) name, there's no correlation between Cartcher and the
>war. First off, it was largely written during the war. Secondly, the New
>Yorker people badgered Salinger to write a major work about the war for
>years after 45 and after 52. While he repeatedly remarked about considering
>the possibility, in the end, he decided not to. Had he done so already, by
>way of Catcher, wouldn't he have mentioned it?
>

-
* Unsubscribing? Mail majordomo@roughdraft.org with the message
* UNSUBSCRIBE BANANAFISH

Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Search - Find what you’re looking for faster. --0-2075032434-1078421351=:71906-- - * Unsubscribing? Mail majordomo@roughdraft.org with the message * UNSUBSCRIBE BANANAFISH From oconnort@panix.com Thu Mar 4 14:44:34 2004 Received: by dont.panix.com (8.11.6p2-a/8.8.8/PanixLC1.7) id i24JiXV07736 for bananafish-outgoing; Thu, 4 Mar 2004 14:44:34 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <20040304184856.74463.qmail@web60901.mail.yahoo.com> Date: Thu, 4 Mar 2004 10:48:56 -0800 (PST) From: City Cabin Subject: Re: Holden and Death To: bananafish@roughdraft.org In-Reply-To: <20040304154250.9053.qmail@web13907.mail.yahoo.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Sender: owner-bananafish@roughdraft.org Precedence: bulk Reply-To: bananafish@roughdraft.org --- David Johnson wrote: > Even more tantalizing is the story (did Bruce post > this?) about Salinger telling people in the 1970s > that he had indeed completed a novel about WWII. > This appeared in a gossip column in 1971 (sorry, > can't remember the source immediately) and another > poster indicated that Salinger mentioned it at his > NYC detective friend's retirement party in 1978 > (said friend was a war buddy of JDS, I think). > It wasn't me. And, frankly, I have little faith in these periodic Salinger reports. Rumor seems to get recycled. I believe Salinger has been writing since 1965. But for how long, and how much, and about what, I think only he knows. --Bruce __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Search - Find what you’re looking for faster http://search.yahoo.com - * Unsubscribing? Mail majordomo@roughdraft.org with the message * UNSUBSCRIBE BANANAFISH From oconnort@panix.com Thu Mar 4 14:44:34 2004 Received: by dont.panix.com (8.11.6p2-a/8.8.8/PanixLC1.7) id i24JiYV07745 for bananafish-outgoing; Thu, 4 Mar 2004 14:44:34 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <20040304192735.10011.qmail@web60902.mail.yahoo.com> Date: Thu, 4 Mar 2004 11:27:35 -0800 (PST) From: City Cabin Subject: Re: Holden and Death To: bananafish@roughdraft.org In-Reply-To: <001001c401a1$cbc42b90$0101a8c0@Monster> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Sender: owner-bananafish@roughdraft.org Precedence: bulk Reply-To: bananafish@roughdraft.org --- Kenneth wrote: > Burnett (sorry > I said New Yorker before) Thanks for the clarification. --Bruce __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Search - Find what you’re looking for faster http://search.yahoo.com - * Unsubscribing? Mail majordomo@roughdraft.org with the message * UNSUBSCRIBE BANANAFISH From oconnort@panix.com Thu Mar 4 16:21:48 2004 Received: from localhost (localhost [[UNIX: localhost]]) by dont.panix.com (8.11.6p2-a/8.8.8/PanixLC1.7) id i24LLmP11199 for bananafish-outgoing; Thu, 4 Mar 2004 16:21:48 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <40478FD3.9030705@drew.edu> Date: Thu, 04 Mar 2004 15:21:39 -0500 From: James Rovira User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.3) Gecko/20030312 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: bananafish@roughdraft.org Subject: Re: Holden and Death References: <40462DC5.ADC2.F4D9.000*/c=us/admd=/prmd=or.gov/o=HR/ou=gwise/s=Anello/g=Michael/i=J/@MHS> <002301c40178$3cb93310$0101a8c0@Monster> <40473FF0.6020200@drew.edu> <003901c4020a$95bff3d0$0101a8c0@Monster> In-Reply-To: <003901c4020a$95bff3d0$0101a8c0@Monster> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-bananafish@roughdraft.org Precedence: bulk Reply-To: bananafish@roughdraft.org "Deconstruction" really has nothing to do with our discussion at this point. I think this is shorthand for "arbitrary" as you are using it below. What I was trying to describe was a possible "emotional" mapping of CITR. These usually proceed from anti-intentional, psychoanalytic models that produce the type of reading that you describe in your last line (Holden's incestuous desire for Phoebe). So if you want to blame anyone for nonsense in literary criticism, blame psychoanalysis first, not deconstruction. Salinger's own dislike of literary criticism is, I suspect, specifically directed toward the psychoanalytic models dominating US letters during the first half of the 20th century. At any rate, where my thinking overlaps with some psychoanalytic premises is that we can feel something without necessarily being able to express those feelings directly (say, by using words). We can, for that matter, understand some of our feelings but not all of them. All this finds expression in fiction. It's possible Salinger had some feelings about war and the military that found not quite intentional expression. The expectations you describe below are still modeled on intentionality -- assuming that Salinger would always know what he thought/felt and deliberately try to write it into his fiction. I don't think that's always the case. I'm very hesistant about trying to describe this, though. I really like your close attention to the different revisions of Catcher, by the way. Jim Kenneth wrote: >I suppose you can take a completely deconstructionist view of Catcher >regarding the war. The problem is that great chunks of the novel remain >unaltered from before and during his service. If there is a war message >there, even subliminally, you'd think that he would have written with a >frenzy immediately after the war while thoughts or "feelings" were freshest >and most compelling. Instead, he stopped writing (at least Catcher) at this >time as if to first cleanse or readjust himself in order to continue the >work. In fact, any reference to the war in Catcher appears to have been >added in very late and quite intentionally. There are a handful of portions >which are obviously added or altered for one reason or another and are easy >to discern. This is one of them. >I've also read "professional analysis" of Catcher that accuses Holden of >incestual feelings toward Phoebe. It's one thing to read this kind of stuff >for amusement, it's another to let it impact your own perceptions. > > > - * Unsubscribing? Mail majordomo@roughdraft.org with the message * UNSUBSCRIBE BANANAFISH From oconnort@panix.com Thu Mar 4 20:41:14 2004 Received: from localhost (localhost [[UNIX: localhost]]) by dont.panix.com (8.11.6p2-a/8.8.8/PanixLC1.7) id i251fEN21438 for bananafish-outgoing; Thu, 4 Mar 2004 20:41:14 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <001b01c40236$ac1a97d0$0101a8c0@Monster> From: "Kenneth" To: References: <40462DC5.ADC2.F4D9.000*/c=us/admd=/prmd=or.gov/o=HR/ou=gwise/s=Anello/g=Michael/i=J/@MHS> <002301c40178$3cb93310$0101a8c0@Monster> <40473FF0.6020200@drew.edu> <003901c4020a$95bff3d0$0101a8c0@Monster> <40478FD3.9030705@drew.edu> Subject: Re: Holden and Death Date: Thu, 4 Mar 2004 17:18:50 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1158 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1165 X-Authentication-Info: Submitted using SMTP AUTH at out002.verizon.net from [141.153.196.7] at Thu, 4 Mar 2004 16:18:46 -0600 Sender: owner-bananafish@roughdraft.org Precedence: bulk Reply-To: bananafish@roughdraft.org "Arbitrary" is a far kinder term than the one I had in mind. ----- Original Message ----- From: "James Rovira" To: Sent: Thursday, March 04, 2004 3:21 PM Subject: Re: Holden and Death > "Deconstruction" really has nothing to do with our discussion at this > point. I think this is shorthand for "arbitrary" as you are using it > below. What I was trying to describe was a possible "emotional" > mapping of CITR. These usually proceed from anti-intentional, > psychoanalytic models that produce the type of reading that you > describe in your last line (Holden's incestuous desire for Phoebe). So > if you want to blame anyone for nonsense in literary criticism, blame > psychoanalysis first, not deconstruction. Salinger's own dislike of > literary criticism is, I suspect, specifically directed toward the > psychoanalytic models dominating US letters during the first half of the > 20th century. > > > At any rate, where my thinking overlaps with some psychoanalytic > premises is that we can feel something without necessarily being able to > express those feelings directly (say, by using words). We can, for that > matter, understand some of our feelings but not all of them. All this > finds expression in fiction. It's possible Salinger had some feelings > about war and the military that found not quite intentional expression. > The expectations you describe below are still modeled on intentionality > -- assuming that Salinger would always know what he thought/felt and > deliberately try to write it into his fiction. I don't think that's > always the case. I'm very hesistant about trying to describe this, though. > > > I really like your close attention to the different revisions of > Catcher, by the way. > > > Jim > > Kenneth wrote: > > >I suppose you can take a completely deconstructionist view of Catcher > >regarding the war. The problem is that great chunks of the novel remain > >unaltered from before and during his service. If there is a war message > >there, even subliminally, you'd think that he would have written with a > >frenzy immediately after the war while thoughts or "feelings" were freshest > >and most compelling. Instead, he stopped writing (at least Catcher) at this > >time as if to first cleanse or readjust himself in order to continue the > >work. In fact, any reference to the war in Catcher appears to have been > >added in very late and quite intentionally. There are a handful of portions > >which are obviously added or altered for one reason or another and are easy > >to discern. This is one of them. > >I've also read "professional analysis" of Catcher that accuses Holden of > >incestual feelings toward Phoebe. It's one thing to read this kind of stuff > >for amusement, it's another to let it impact your own perceptions. > > > > > > > > - > * Unsubscribing? Mail majordomo@roughdraft.org with the message > * UNSUBSCRIBE BANANAFISH > - * Unsubscribing? Mail majordomo@roughdraft.org with the message * UNSUBSCRIBE BANANAFISH From oconnort@panix.com Fri Mar 5 19:37:51 2004 Received: by dont.panix.com (8.11.6p2-a/8.8.8/PanixLC1.7) id i260bpu15380 for bananafish-outgoing; Fri, 5 Mar 2004 19:37:51 -0500 (EST) X400-Received: by mta Salem-MTA1 in /c=US/admd= /prmd=or.gov/; Relayed; 05 Mar 2004 14:12:11 -0800 X400-Received: by /c=US/admd= /prmd=or.gov/; Relayed; 05 Mar 2004 14:12:11 -0800 X400-MTS-Identifier: [/c=US/admd= /prmd=or.gov/; 4048FB30.ADC2.B96F.000] Content-Identifier: 011734048FB3B005 Content-Return: Allowed X400-Content-Type: P2-1988 ( 22 ) Conversion: Allowed Original-Encoded-Information-Types: IA5-Text Disclose-Recipients: Prohibited Alternate-Recipient: Allowed X400-Originator: Michael.J.Anello@state.or.us X400-Recipients: non-disclosure; Message-Id: <4048FB30.ADC2.B96F.000*/c=us/admd=/prmd=or.gov/o=HR/ou=gwise/s=Anello/g=Michael/i=J/@MHS> Date: 05 Mar 2004 14:12:11 -0800 From: ANELLO Michael J To: bananafish@roughdraft.org, citycabn@yahoo.com Subject: RE: Holden and Death Sender: owner-bananafish@roughdraft.org Precedence: bulk Reply-To: bananafish@roughdraft.org where is this contributor's note from? -mike >>> citycabn@yahoo.com 03/03/04 06:26PM >>> At the end of 1945, in a Contributors' Note, Salinger wrote: "So far the novels of this war have had too much of the strength, maturity and craftsmanship critics are looking for, and too little of the glorious imperfections which teeter and fall off the best minds. The men who have been in this war deserve some sort of trembling melody rendered without embarrassment or regret. I'll watch out for that book." - * Unsubscribing? Mail majordomo@roughdraft.org with the message * UNSUBSCRIBE BANANAFISH From oconnort@panix.com Fri Mar 5 19:37:50 2004 Received: from localhost (localhost [[UNIX: localhost]]) by dont.panix.com (8.11.6p2-a/8.8.8/PanixLC1.7) id i260boJ15368 for bananafish-outgoing; Fri, 5 Mar 2004 19:37:50 -0500 (EST) X-Originating-IP: [134.50.112.1] X-Originating-Email: [ralanya@hotmail.com] X-Sender: ralanya@hotmail.com From: "Robin Dudley" To: bananafish@roughdraft.org Subject: Re: Holden and Death Date: Fri, 05 Mar 2004 18:25:26 +0000 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed Message-ID: X-OriginalArrivalTime: 05 Mar 2004 18:25:26.0468 (UTC) FILETIME=[3B09D840:01C402DF] Sender: owner-bananafish@roughdraft.org Precedence: bulk Reply-To: bananafish@roughdraft.org Kenny2: Which "great chunks of the novel remain unaltered from before" Salinger's service? I am only aware of "I'm Crazy" and "Slight Rebellion," which were both published post-1944. Robin >From: "Kenneth" >Reply-To: bananafish@roughdraft.org >To: >Subject: Re: Holden and Death >Date: Thu, 4 Mar 2004 12:03:14 -0500 > >I suppose you can take a completely deconstructionist view of Catcher >regarding the war. The problem is that great chunks of the novel remain >unaltered from before and during his service. If there is a war message >there, even subliminally, you'd think that he would have written with a >frenzy immediately after the war while thoughts or "feelings" were freshest >and most compelling. Instead, he stopped writing (at least Catcher) at this >time as if to first cleanse or readjust himself in order to continue the >work. In fact, any reference to the war in Catcher appears to have been >added in very late and quite intentionally. There are a handful of portions >which are obviously added or altered for one reason or another and are easy >to discern. This is one of them. >I've also read "professional analysis" of Catcher that accuses Holden of >incestual feelings toward Phoebe. It's one thing to read this kind of stuff >for amusement, it's another to let it impact your own perceptions. > >----- Original Message ----- >From: "James Rovira" >To: >Sent: Thursday, March 04, 2004 9:40 AM >Subject: Re: Holden and Death > > > > I see the point of these critiques of Pinkser's ideas, but I think it's > > too dependent upon intentionality. Authors can map their feelings as > > well as their ideas onto their work, and Pinsker's kind of criticism > > seems to be exploring Catcher's emotional landscape rather than > > ideological. > > > > So what Salinger -thought- about the war may have been somewhat > > different from what he -felt- about it. > > > > What I would dislike about the Pinsker would be its treatment of > > literature as a kind of "secret code" of sorts ("Hold-in" "Caul-field"), > > which is more a revelation of the ingenuity of the critic than the work > > itself. But I find it hard to argue with Pinsker about Salinger's > > obsession with death or, more precisely (thanks to Bruce), the dead > > sibling. That's the driving force behind the Glass family stories. > > The Dead Seymour hovers over the entire family. > > > > Jim > > > > Kenneth wrote: > > > > >This one's outta the ballpark. And Mike, you know better. Apart from >Allie's > > >(belatedly inserted) name, there's no correlation between Cartcher and >the > > >war. First off, it was largely written during the war. Secondly, the >New > > >Yorker people badgered Salinger to write a major work about the war for > > >years after 45 and after 52. While he repeatedly remarked about >considering > > >the possibility, in the end, he decided not to. Had he done so already, >by > > >way of Catcher, wouldn't he have mentioned it? > > > > > > > - > > * Unsubscribing? Mail majordomo@roughdraft.org with the message > > * UNSUBSCRIBE BANANAFISH > > > >- >* Unsubscribing? Mail majordomo@roughdraft.org with the message >* UNSUBSCRIBE BANANAFISH _________________________________________________________________ Learn how to help protect your privacy and prevent fraud online at Tech Hacks & Scams. http://special.msn.com/msnbc/techsafety.armx - * Unsubscribing? Mail majordomo@roughdraft.org with the message * UNSUBSCRIBE BANANAFISH From oconnort@panix.com Fri Mar 5 19:37:50 2004 Received: from localhost (localhost [[UNIX: localhost]]) by dont.panix.com (8.11.6p2-a/8.8.8/PanixLC1.7) id i260boh15374 for bananafish-outgoing; Fri, 5 Mar 2004 19:37:50 -0500 (EST) X400-Received: by mta Salem-MTA1 in /c=US/admd= /prmd=or.gov/; Relayed; 05 Mar 2004 14:07:31 -0800 X400-Received: by /c=US/admd= /prmd=or.gov/; Relayed; 05 Mar 2004 14:07:31 -0800 X400-MTS-Identifier: [/c=US/admd= /prmd=or.gov/; 4048FA22.ADC2.B8CB.000] Content-Identifier: 007634048FA23009 Content-Return: Allowed X400-Content-Type: P2-1988 ( 22 ) Conversion: Allowed Original-Encoded-Information-Types: IA5-Text Disclose-Recipients: Prohibited Alternate-Recipient: Allowed X400-Originator: Michael.J.Anello@state.or.us X400-Recipients: non-disclosure; Message-Id: <4048FA22.ADC2.B8CB.000*/c=us/admd=/prmd=or.gov/o=HR/ou=gwise/s=Anello/g=Michael/i=J/@MHS> Date: 05 Mar 2004 14:07:31 -0800 From: ANELLO Michael J To: bananafish@roughdraft.org, kenny2@verizon.net Subject: Re: Holden and Death Sender: owner-bananafish@roughdraft.org Precedence: bulk Reply-To: bananafish@roughdraft.org I see. No, i was responding to Robin's idea that death pervades the book. I never saw it in that light, always saw it as a coming-of-age type novel. That's what I thought was awesome...new light to something I'd never thought of before in a novel I've read less than a hundred times. >>> kenny2@verizon.net 03/03/04 04:16PM >>> This one's outta the ballpark. And Mike, you know better. Apart from Allie's (belatedly inserted) name, there's no correlation between Cartcher and the war. First off, it was largely written during the war. Secondly, the New Yorker people badgered Salinger to write a major work about the war for years after 45 and after 52. While he repeatedly remarked about considering the possibility, in the end, he decided not to. Had he done so already, by way of Catcher, wouldn't he have mentioned it? His short stories which do deal with war condemn it mainly concerning the issue of induction. If there is any parralell between Catcher and the war (actually, the Army - alway's capitalized) it involves induction - an issue which is easily assumed by society after 45. He doesn't so much change that message as he changes or updates the props which represent it. Aside from that, Salinger is remarkably silent regarding the war and the vital questions it raises. (Okay, he speaks eloquently for his fellow-soldiers in Esme, but that neither condemns war nor shows any obsession with death.) It seems that far from being horrified by his military experience, he consistantly sought promotions and areas where he could more actively serve. In short, he seems to have taken his military service as his duty. Could this be due to his military upbringing? I don't know. I especially cannot agree with the interpretation of a "Grim Reaper" kind of death in Catcher. Salinger's not about that kind of death at all. He's about the continuity of life despite death, sometimes even through it. Allie lives on through Holden and Holden will live on through Phoebe (and let's not get into the Glass Clan). It's a level of human connectivity that, far from being "obsessed" with death, defies it. Most of Salinger's characters greet (yes, greet) death with a certain kind of enlightened aplomb having gained that revelation. To miss these points is to miss the boat. Pinsker my butt. ----- Original Message ----- From: "ANELLO Michael J" To: ; ralanya@hotmail.com Sent: Wednesday, March 03, 2004 2:11 PM Subject: RE: Holden and Death > Wow, Robin. Who are you, and why are you so awesome? > > -Mike > > >>> ralanya@hotmail.com 03/03/04 11:07AM >>> > Dear Bananafishers, > Regarding Pinsker on Holden's death complex: > YES. Jane Mendelsohn in the last essay in Kotzen's "With Love and Squalor" > writes that she found "references to death on almost every other page." > Allie, James Castle, Holden's hurt hand all confirm my theory: since Holden > appeared directly after Babe and Vincent, and then Vincent dies; since > Holden was originally a "dead brother"...Certainly, Holden is obsessed with > death, or rather Salinger was when he wrote Holden in TCITR. D.B. probably > stands for Dead Brother, (aesthetically dead) unless the D is for David, > also. Holden Caulfield means "Hold-in" the "Caul-field." The Grim Reaper > wears a Caul...I think Catcher is a war story, that Holden is a surrogate > soldier telling a war story without ever having to mention the Hurtgen > Forest or Jeeps or gas masks. Yes, yes. yes. > Robin > > >From: Michael Allen Nowek > >Reply-To: bananafish@roughdraft.org > >To: bananafish@roughdraft.org > >Subject: Holden and Death > >Date: Fri, 27 Feb 2004 17:33:20 -0500 (EST) > > > >Hello Everyone, > >I just finished Sanford PinSker's "CITR: Innocence Under Pressure" and > >a good section of the book dealt with all of the elements in Catcher > >dealing with death (Allie, mummies...). Pinsker suggests that Holden's > >obsession with stasis may have to do with an obsession with death > >rather than life, because life is messy and always changing. Do any of > >you think that Holden has a death complex? > >-Mike N > >- > >* Unsubscribing? Mail majordomo@roughdraft.org with the message > >* UNSUBSCRIBE BANANAFISH > > _________________________________________________________________ > Store more e-mails with MSN Hotmail Extra Storage 4 plans to choose from! > http://click.atdmt.com/AVE/go/onm00200362ave/direct/01/ > > - > * Unsubscribing? Mail majordomo@roughdraft.org with the message > * UNSUBSCRIBE BANANAFISH > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > - > * Unsubscribing? Mail majordomo@roughdraft.org with the message > * UNSUBSCRIBE BANANAFISH > - * Unsubscribing? Mail majordomo@roughdraft.org with the message * UNSUBSCRIBE BANANAFISH - * Unsubscribing? Mail majordomo@roughdraft.org with the message * UNSUBSCRIBE BANANAFISH From oconnort@panix.com Fri Mar 5 19:37:55 2004 Received: from localhost (localhost [[UNIX: localhost]]) by dont.panix.com (8.11.6p2-a/8.8.8/PanixLC1.7) id i260btw15416 for bananafish-outgoing; Fri, 5 Mar 2004 19:37:55 -0500 (EST) X400-Received: by mta Salem-MTA1 in /c=US/admd= /prmd=or.gov/; Relayed; 05 Mar 2004 14:18:40 -0800 X400-Received: by /c=US/admd= /prmd=or.gov/; Relayed; 05 Mar 2004 14:18:40 -0800 X400-MTS-Identifier: [/c=US/admd= /prmd=or.gov/; 4048FCB6.ADC2.BA96.000] Content-Identifier: 01DBE4048FCC0002 Content-Return: Allowed X400-Content-Type: P2-1988 ( 22 ) Conversion: Allowed Original-Encoded-Information-Types: IA5-Text Disclose-Recipients: Prohibited Alternate-Recipient: Allowed X400-Originator: Michael.J.Anello@state.or.us X400-Recipients: non-disclosure; Message-Id: <4048FCB6.ADC2.BA96.000*/c=us/admd=/prmd=or.gov/o=HR/ou=gwise/s=Anello/g=Michael/i=J/@MHS> Date: 05 Mar 2004 14:18:40 -0800 From: ANELLO Michael J To: bananafish@roughdraft.org, jrovira@drew.edu Subject: Re: Holden and Death Sender: owner-bananafish@roughdraft.org Precedence: bulk Reply-To: bananafish@roughdraft.org i, like kenneth, would not view salinger as obsessed with death. life includes death, but death does not include life. i would say that salinger was obsessed with life. -mike >>> jrovira@drew.edu 03/04/04 08:27AM >>> I see the point of these critiques of Pinkser's ideas, but I think it's too dependent upon intentionality. Authors can map their feelings as well as their ideas onto their work, and Pinsker's kind of criticism seems to be exploring Catcher's emotional landscape rather than ideological. So what Salinger -thought- about the war may have been somewhat different from what he -felt- about it. What I would dislike about the Pinsker would be its treatment of literature as a kind of "secret code" of sorts ("Hold-in" "Caul-field"), which is more a revelation of the ingenuity of the critic than the work itself. But I find it hard to argue with Pinsker about Salinger's obsession with death or, more precisely (thanks to Bruce), the dead sibling. That's the driving force behind the Glass family stories. The Dead Seymour hovers over the entire family. Jim Kenneth wrote: >This one's outta the ballpark. And Mike, you know better. Apart from Allie's >(belatedly inserted) name, there's no correlation between Cartcher and the >war. First off, it was largely written during the war. Secondly, the New >Yorker people badgered Salinger to write a major work about the war for >years after 45 and after 52. While he repeatedly remarked about considering >the possibility, in the end, he decided not to. Had he done so already, by >way of Catcher, wouldn't he have mentioned it? > - * Unsubscribing? Mail majordomo@roughdraft.org with the message * UNSUBSCRIBE BANANAFISH - * Unsubscribing? Mail majordomo@roughdraft.org with the message * UNSUBSCRIBE BANANAFISH From oconnort@panix.com Fri Mar 5 19:37:52 2004 Received: from localhost (localhost [[UNIX: localhost]]) by dont.panix.com (8.11.6p2-a/8.8.8/PanixLC1.7) id i260bqE15398 for bananafish-outgoing; Fri, 5 Mar 2004 19:37:52 -0500 (EST) X400-Received: by mta Salem-MTA1 in /c=US/admd= /prmd=or.gov/; Relayed; 05 Mar 2004 14:24:40 -0800 X400-Received: by /c=US/admd= /prmd=or.gov/; Relayed; 05 Mar 2004 14:24:40 -0800 X400-MTS-Identifier: [/c=US/admd= /prmd=or.gov/; 4048FE1E.ADC2.BB8F.000] Content-Identifier: 029804048FE28003 Content-Return: Allowed X400-Content-Type: P2-1988 ( 22 ) Conversion: Allowed Original-Encoded-Information-Types: IA5-Text Disclose-Recipients: Prohibited Alternate-Recipient: Allowed X400-Originator: Michael.J.Anello@state.or.us X400-Recipients: non-disclosure; Message-Id: <4048FE1E.ADC2.BB8F.000*/c=us/admd=/prmd=or.gov/o=HR/ou=gwise/s=Anello/g=Michael/i=J/@MHS> Date: 05 Mar 2004 14:24:40 -0800 From: ANELLO Michael J To: bananafish@roughdraft.org, djohnso2001@yahoo.com Subject: Re: Holden and Death Sender: owner-bananafish@roughdraft.org Precedence: bulk Reply-To: bananafish@roughdraft.org does anyone, by chance, have a copy of the TIME story that they can fax or mail to me or something? thanks, -mike >>> djohnso2001@yahoo.com 03/04/04 11:47AM >>> Then there's also the mystery of Salinger's adolescent friend who died, alluded to in the Time story... I don't think I've ever seen this elaborated upon anywhere. James Rovira wrote:I see the point of these critiques of Pinkser's ideas, but I think it's too dependent upon intentionality. Authors can map their feelings as well as their ideas onto their work, and Pinsker's kind of criticism seems to be exploring Catcher's emotional landscape rather than ideological. So what Salinger -thought- about the war may have been somewhat different from what he -felt- about it. What I would dislike about the Pinsker would be its treatment of literature as a kind of "secret code" of sorts ("Hold-in" "Caul-field"), which is more a revelation of the ingenuity of the critic than the work itself. But I find it hard to argue with Pinsker about Salinger's obsession with death or, more precisely (thanks to Bruce), the dead sibling. That's the driving force behind the Glass family stories. The Dead Seymour hovers over the entire family. Jim Kenneth wrote: >This one's outta the ballpark. And Mike, you know better. Apart from Allie's >(belatedly inserted) name, there's no correlation between Cartcher and the >war. First off, it was largely written during the war. Secondly, the New >Yorker people badgered Salinger to write a major work about the war for >years after 45 and after 52. While he repeatedly remarked about considering >the possibility, in the end, he decided not to. Had he done so already, by >way of Catcher, wouldn't he have mentioned it? > - * Unsubscribing? Mail majordomo@roughdraft.org with the message * UNSUBSCRIBE BANANAFISH --------------------------------- Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Search - Find what youre looking for faster. - * Unsubscribing? Mail majordomo@roughdraft.org with the message * UNSUBSCRIBE BANANAFISH From oconnort@panix.com Fri Mar 5 19:37:53 2004 Received: from localhost (localhost [[UNIX: localhost]]) by dont.panix.com (8.11.6p2-a/8.8.8/PanixLC1.7) id i260brq15410 for bananafish-outgoing; Fri, 5 Mar 2004 19:37:53 -0500 (EST) X400-Received: by mta Salem-MTA1 in /c=US/admd= /prmd=or.gov/; Relayed; 05 Mar 2004 14:36:38 -0800 X400-Received: by /c=US/admd= /prmd=or.gov/; Relayed; 05 Mar 2004 14:36:38 -0800 X400-MTS-Identifier: [/c=US/admd= /prmd=or.gov/; 404900F4.ADC2.BD2E.000] Content-Identifier: 04183404900F6008 Content-Return: Allowed X400-Content-Type: P2-1988 ( 22 ) Conversion: Allowed Original-Encoded-Information-Types: IA5-Text Disclose-Recipients: Prohibited Alternate-Recipient: Allowed X400-Originator: Michael.J.Anello@state.or.us X400-Recipients: non-disclosure; Message-Id: <404900F4.ADC2.BD2E.000*/c=us/admd=/prmd=or.gov/o=HR/ou=gwise/s=Anello/g=Michael/i=J/@MHS> Date: 05 Mar 2004 14:36:38 -0800 From: ANELLO Michael J To: bananafish@roughdraft.org, citycabn@yahoo.com Subject: RE: Holden and Death Sender: owner-bananafish@roughdraft.org Precedence: bulk Reply-To: bananafish@roughdraft.org dangit, bobby! does anyone happen to have a copy of this end-note from the October 1945 Esquire that they could fax or mail me? I believe it's the one with the famous salinger quote about him being a dash man and not a miler...? (my copy of "sandwich" seems to come from some short story compilation...) thanks, -mike >>> citycabn@yahoo.com 03/05/04 02:29PM >>> *If* we can trust Ian Hamilton's endnotes, it comes from Esquire's "This Sandwich Has No Mayo." --Bruce --- ANELLO Michael J wrote: > where is this contributor's note from? > > -mike > > >>> citycabn@yahoo.com 03/03/04 06:26PM >>> > At the end of 1945, in a Contributors' Note, > Salinger > wrote: > > "So far the novels of this war have had too much of > the strength, maturity and craftsmanship critics are > looking for, and too little of the glorious > imperfections which teeter and fall off the best > minds. The men who have been in this war deserve > some > sort of trembling melody rendered without > embarrassment or regret. I'll watch out for that > book." > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Search - Find what youre looking for faster http://search.yahoo.com - * Unsubscribing? Mail majordomo@roughdraft.org with the message * UNSUBSCRIBE BANANAFISH From oconnort@panix.com Fri Mar 5 19:37:49 2004 Received: by dont.panix.com (8.11.6p2-a/8.8.8/PanixLC1.7) id i260bnd15362 for bananafish-outgoing; Fri, 5 Mar 2004 19:37:49 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <20040305174126.89819.qmail@web60907.mail.yahoo.com> Date: Fri, 5 Mar 2004 09:41:26 -0800 (PST) From: City Cabin Subject: Faulkner re JDS To: bananafish@roughdraft.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Sender: owner-bananafish@roughdraft.org Precedence: bulk Reply-To: bananafish@roughdraft.org In the mid-fifties the University of Virginia received an endowment to establish a writer-in-residence. Frederick L. Gwynn (the lead half of the famed vaudeville team of Gwynn and Blotner, whose shared credits include the first stand-alone work on the fiction of J. D. Salinger (a 1958 pamphlet which I imagine Matt might still recommmend?)) was chosen to find a writer for the academic year of '57-'58. After asking William Carlos Williams, who declined on the basis of his health, and after asking someone named J. D. Salinger, who, guess what, also declined, based on "he had done that kind of thing once and found it was not for him" (a veiled reference to his November 1949 experience at Sarah Lawrence College, when he had accepted an invitation from *the* Mrs. Hortense Flexner King to address her writing class of young ladies), Professor Gwynn snagged *his* favorite author, a minor scribbler from the south by the name of William Faulkner. (Before I go too far into this, I might add Salinger was also being asked to teach at the University of Michigan, but declined in a January 10, 1957 letter to a Warner G. Rice. I take it that JDS didn't want a second opportunity in which he rectify his mistake at Sarah Lawrence and now call out in a loud voice the names of the writers he loved.) Evidently, all of Faulkner's lectures were recorded on tape. A selection from these tapes was edited by Gwynn and his second banana, Joseph L. Blotner. On the April 24, 1958 tape, Faulkner read a short essay of his to the English Club. In part, he wrote: "I have not read all the work of this present generation of writing; I have not had time yet. So I must speak only of the ones I do know. I am thinking now of what I rate the best one: Salinger's Catcher in the Rye, perhaps because this one expresses so completely what I have tried to say: a youth, father to what will, must someday be a man, more intelligent than some and more sensitive than most, who (he would not even have called it by instinct because he did not know he possessed it) because God perhaps had put it there, loved man and wished to be a part of mankind, humanity, who tried to join the human race and failed. To me, his tragedy was not that he was, as he perhaps thought, not tough enough or brave enough or deserving enough to be accepted into humanity. His tragedy was that when he attempted to enter the human race, there was no human race there." (Whether we agree or not with this assessment, I enjoyed typing it out.) As if to make up for his part in the earlier skimpy Salinger publication, Joseph L. Blotner dashed off a two-volume biography of Faulker (one upping his partner?), pagination totalling 1,846; plus 217 pages of endnotes. Buried within these endnotes is the information that it was Gywnn who loaned Faulkner his copy of Catcher. And, as a final remark regarding the Faulkner/Salinger alignment, Blotner lets his reader know that Faulkner later told *him* that Catcher "would have made a good short story." Nobel, or no Nobel, can't say I agree with *that*. --Bruce __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Search - Find what you’re looking for faster http://search.yahoo.com - * Unsubscribing? Mail majordomo@roughdraft.org with the message * UNSUBSCRIBE BANANAFISH From oconnort@panix.com Fri Mar 5 19:37:51 2004 Received: by dont.panix.com (8.11.6p2-a/8.8.8/PanixLC1.7) id i260bp715387 for bananafish-outgoing; Fri, 5 Mar 2004 19:37:51 -0500 (EST) X400-Received: by mta Salem-MTA1 in /c=US/admd= /prmd=or.gov/; Relayed; 05 Mar 2004 14:17:04 -0800 X400-Received: by /c=US/admd= /prmd=or.gov/; Relayed; 05 Mar 2004 14:17:04 -0800 X400-MTS-Identifier: [/c=US/admd= /prmd=or.gov/; 4048FC5C.ADC2.BA5B.000] Content-Identifier: 01B4F4048FC60001 Content-Return: Allowed X400-Content-Type: P2-1988 ( 22 ) Conversion: Allowed Original-Encoded-Information-Types: IA5-Text Disclose-Recipients: Prohibited Alternate-Recipient: Allowed X400-Originator: Michael.J.Anello@state.or.us X400-Recipients: non-disclosure; Message-Id: <4048FC5C.ADC2.BA5B.000*/c=us/admd=/prmd=or.gov/o=HR/ou=gwise/s=Anello/g=Michael/i=J/@MHS> Date: 05 Mar 2004 14:17:04 -0800 From: ANELLO Michael J To: bananafish@roughdraft.org, kenny2@verizon.net Subject: Re: Holden and Death Sender: owner-bananafish@roughdraft.org Precedence: bulk Reply-To: bananafish@roughdraft.org i don't know kenneth, "i love catcher because it is so left to interpretation, allowing it to be personalized and intimate." all else is judgement not coming from salinger's mouth...don't you think? -mike >>> kenny2@verizon.net 03/03/04 09:38PM >>> I love Catcher because it is so left to interpretation, allowing it to be personalized and intimate. But some directions are so askew as to be distractions to the beauty of the book's intention. - * Unsubscribing? Mail majordomo@roughdraft.org with the message * UNSUBSCRIBE BANANAFISH From oconnort@panix.com Fri Mar 5 19:37:52 2004 Received: from localhost (localhost [[UNIX: localhost]]) by dont.panix.com (8.11.6p2-a/8.8.8/PanixLC1.7) id i260bqe15409 for bananafish-outgoing; Fri, 5 Mar 2004 19:37:52 -0500 (EST) X400-Received: by mta Salem-MTA1 in /c=US/admd= /prmd=or.gov/; Relayed; 05 Mar 2004 14:27:13 -0800 X400-Received: by /c=US/admd= /prmd=or.gov/; Relayed; 05 Mar 2004 14:27:13 -0800 X400-MTS-Identifier: [/c=US/admd= /prmd=or.gov/; 4048FEB4.ADC2.BBD8.000] Content-Identifier: 02FC54048FEC1002 Content-Return: Allowed X400-Content-Type: P2-1988 ( 22 ) Conversion: Allowed Original-Encoded-Information-Types: IA5-Text Disclose-Recipients: Prohibited Alternate-Recipient: Allowed X400-Originator: Michael.J.Anello@state.or.us X400-Recipients: non-disclosure; Message-Id: <4048FEB4.ADC2.BBD8.000*/c=us/admd=/prmd=or.gov/o=HR/ou=gwise/s=Anello/g=Michael/i=J/@MHS> Date: 05 Mar 2004 14:27:13 -0800 From: ANELLO Michael J To: bananafish@roughdraft.org, jrovira@drew.edu Subject: Re: Holden and Death Sender: owner-bananafish@roughdraft.org Precedence: bulk Reply-To: bananafish@roughdraft.org wow. well, i don't really think salinger was thinking this deep when he was writing catcher in the rye. just my opinion though. "emotional mapping" sounds like a phrase that didn't exist in the 50's. -mike >>> jrovira@drew.edu 03/04/04 01:23PM >>> "Deconstruction" really has nothing to do with our discussion at this point. I think this is shorthand for "arbitrary" as you are using it below. What I was trying to describe was a possible "emotional" mapping of CITR. These usually proceed from anti-intentional, psychoanalytic models that produce the type of reading that you describe in your last line (Holden's incestuous desire for Phoebe). So if you want to blame anyone for nonsense in literary criticism, blame psychoanalysis first, not deconstruction. Salinger's own dislike of literary criticism is, I suspect, specifically directed toward the psychoanalytic models dominating US letters during the first half of the 20th century. At any rate, where my thinking overlaps with some psychoanalytic premises is that we can feel something without necessarily being able to express those feelings directly (say, by using words). We can, for that matter, understand some of our feelings but not all of them. All this finds expression in fiction. It's possible Salinger had some feelings about war and the military that found not quite intentional expression. The expectations you describe below are still modeled on intentionality -- assuming that Salinger would always know what he thought/felt and deliberately try to write it into his fiction. I don't think that's always the case. I'm very hesistant about trying to describe this, though. I really like your close attention to the different revisions of Catcher, by the way. Jim Kenneth wrote: >I suppose you can take a completely deconstructionist view of Catcher >regarding the war. The problem is that great chunks of the novel remain >unaltered from before and during his service. If there is a war message >there, even subliminally, you'd think that he would have written with a >frenzy immediately after the war while thoughts or "feelings" were freshest >and most compelling. Instead, he stopped writing (at least Catcher) at this >time as if to first cleanse or readjust himself in order to continue the >work. In fact, any reference to the war in Catcher appears to have been >added in very late and quite intentionally. There are a handful of portions >which are obviously added or altered for one reason or another and are easy >to discern. This is one of them. >I've also read "professional analysis" of Catcher that accuses Holden of >incestual feelings toward Phoebe. It's one thing to read this kind of stuff >for amusement, it's another to let it impact your own perceptions. > > > - * Unsubscribing? Mail majordomo@roughdraft.org with the message * UNSUBSCRIBE BANANAFISH - * Unsubscribing? Mail majordomo@roughdraft.org with the message * UNSUBSCRIBE BANANAFISH From oconnort@panix.com Fri Mar 5 19:37:53 2004 Received: by dont.panix.com (8.11.6p2-a/8.8.8/PanixLC1.7) id i260brA15415 for bananafish-outgoing; Fri, 5 Mar 2004 19:37:53 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <20040306001721.7112.qmail@web60902.mail.yahoo.com> Date: Fri, 5 Mar 2004 16:17:21 -0800 (PST) From: City Cabin Subject: Heroic Nun Taught Catcher To: bananafish@roughdraft.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Sender: owner-bananafish@roughdraft.org Precedence: bulk Reply-To: bananafish@roughdraft.org >From a November 11, 1961 Flannery O'Connor letter: "When I was in Minnesota last year one of the Sisters there told me that she had taught The Catcher in the Rye in her high school and parents had complained and the Bishop had told her to quit and she defended her position and was consequently sent to some outpost in the Dakotas. Anyway here she was here and in good odor." --Bruce P.S. I haven't forgotten the F&Z review which O'Connor endorsed. Have it on order from Interlibrary Loan. __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Search - Find what you’re looking for faster http://search.yahoo.com - * Unsubscribing? Mail majordomo@roughdraft.org with the message * UNSUBSCRIBE BANANAFISH From oconnort@panix.com Fri Mar 5 19:37:49 2004 Received: from localhost (localhost [[UNIX: localhost]]) by dont.panix.com (8.11.6p2-a/8.8.8/PanixLC1.7) id i260bni15357 for bananafish-outgoing; Fri, 5 Mar 2004 19:37:49 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <001e01c40283$88203540$13a57dc2@j8l6n9> From: "Scottie Bowman" To: References: <40462DC5.ADC2.F4D9.000*/c=us/admd=/prmd=or.gov/o=HR/ou=gwise/s=Anello/g=Michael/i=J/@MHS> <002301c40178$3cb93310$0101a8c0@Monster> <40473FF0.6020200@drew.edu> Subject: Re: Holden and Death Date: Fri, 5 Mar 2004 07:28:11 -0000 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Sender: owner-bananafish@roughdraft.org Precedence: bulk Reply-To: bananafish@roughdraft.org '... a kind of "secret code" of sorts ("Hold-in" "Caul-field"), which is more a revelation of the ingenuity of the critic than ...' etc. Or of schizophrenia in the perpetrator. Look it up in any psychiatric textbook under: 'Thought Disorder - word play, clang-associations, etc.' Joyceans please copy. Scottie B. - * Unsubscribing? Mail majordomo@roughdraft.org with the message * UNSUBSCRIBE BANANAFISH From oconnort@panix.com Fri Mar 5 22:28:31 2004 Received: from localhost (localhost [[UNIX: localhost]]) by dont.panix.com (8.11.6p2-a/8.8.8/PanixLC1.7) id i263SVv20944 for bananafish-outgoing; Fri, 5 Mar 2004 22:28:31 -0500 (EST) Date: Fri, 5 Mar 2004 22:28:30 -0500 From: "Tim O'Connor" To: bananafish@roughdraft.org Subject: ignore me - test of new list settings Message-ID: <25.450dd783.2d7a962b@example.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.1i Sender: owner-bananafish@roughdraft.org Precedence: bulk Reply-To: bananafish@roughdraft.org b bl bla blah blahblah - * Unsubscribing? Mail majordomo@roughdraft.org with the message * UNSUBSCRIBE BANANAFISH From oconnort@panix.com Fri Mar 5 22:34:01 2004 Received: by dont.panix.com (8.11.6p2-a/8.8.8/PanixLC1.7) id i263Y1I21124 for bananafish-outgoing; Fri, 5 Mar 2004 22:34:01 -0500 (EST) From: Omlor@aol.com Message-ID: <25.450dd783.2d7a962b@aol.com> Date: Fri, 5 Mar 2004 21:49:15 EST Subject: Re: Faulkner re JDS To: bananafish@roughdraft.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="part1_25.450dd783.2d7a962b_boundary" X-Mailer: 6.0 sub 10581 Sender: owner-bananafish@roughdraft.org Precedence: bulk Reply-To: bananafish@roughdraft.org --part1_25.450dd783.2d7a962b_boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable William Faulkner writes (or says): "Salinger's Catcher in the Rye, perhaps because this one expresses so=20 completely what I have tried to say:=A0 a youth, father to what will, must s= omeday be a=20 man, more intelligent than some and more sensitive than most, who (he would=20 not even have called it by instinct because he did not know he possessed it)= =20 because God perhaps had put it there, loved man and wished to be a part of=20 mankind, humanity, who tried to join the human race and failed. To me, his t= ragedy=20 was not that he was, as he perhaps thought, not tough enough or brave enough= =20 or deserving enough to be accepted into humanity.=A0 His tragedy was that wh= en he=20 attempted to enter the human race, there was no human race there." Man, do you think Bill lectured that way, too? Imagine it, sitting there as= =20 the parenthetical interruptions and subordinate clauses roll on... *Absalom= ,=20 Absalom!* in the front of the classroom... I think it would be hypnotizing.=20= =20 Or horrifying. --John --part1_25.450dd783.2d7a962b_boundary Content-Type: text/html; charset="ISO-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable William Faulkner writes (or says):

"Salinger's Catcher in the Rye, perhaps because this one expresses so co= mpletely what I have tried to say:=A0 a youth, father to what will, must som= eday be a man, more intelligent than some and more sensitive than most, who=20= (he would not even have called it by instinct because he did not know he pos= sessed it) because God perhaps had put it there, loved man and wished to be=20= a part of mankind, humanity, who tried to join the human race and failed. To= me, his tragedy was not that he was, as he perhaps thought, not tough enoug= h or brave enough or deserving enough to be accepted into humanity.=A0 His t= ragedy was that when he attempted to enter the human race, there was no huma= n race there."

Man, do you think Bill lectured that way, too?  Imagine it, sitting= there as the parenthetical interruptions and subordinate clauses roll on...=  *Absalom, Absalom!* in the front of the classroom... I think it would= be hypnotizing.  Or horrifying.

--John


--part1_25.450dd783.2d7a962b_boundary-- - * Unsubscribing? Mail majordomo@roughdraft.org with the message * UNSUBSCRIBE BANANAFISH From oconnort@panix.com Fri Mar 5 22:34:02 2004 Received: by dont.panix.com (8.11.6p2-a/8.8.8/PanixLC1.7) id i263Y2W21129 for bananafish-outgoing; Fri, 5 Mar 2004 22:34:02 -0500 (EST) X-Originating-IP: [63.167.237.65] X-Originating-Email: [lmanningvines@hotmail.com] X-Sender: lmanningvines@hotmail.com From: "L. Manning Vines" To: Subject: Re: Questioning Question Marks Date: Fri, 5 Mar 2004 21:20:54 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1158 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1165 Message-ID: X-OriginalArrivalTime: 06 Mar 2004 02:50:57.0139 (UTC) FILETIME=[D986F430:01C40325] Sender: owner-bananafish@roughdraft.org Precedence: bulk Reply-To: bananafish@roughdraft.org Jim writes: << "Wonder" as an experience has become so linked to the process of questioning, in our thinking, that it's common to use it in a sentence to introduce a question. >> This is a sensible hypothesis, too, though I'm not yet persuaded by it. When I write the sentence "I wonder if our question mark is headed this way?" or when I say this sentence with the yes/no-question intonation, I don't think that I'm asking a question. I suppose you might argue that I am asking a rhetorical question (I certainly anticipate no answer, even if I am inviting response) but I doubt even this. I am not registering it as a question, at least. Though perhaps "question," in the sense that justifies this punctuation, is only the invitation to response. In this case the mark need not be becoming an indicator of pitch, and neither need the words "I wonder" be becoming a question-introducer. We have questions that are asked and "questions" that are actually simple declaratives inviting a response, and both can take this punctuation. -Robbie - * Unsubscribing? Mail majordomo@roughdraft.org with the message * UNSUBSCRIBE BANANAFISH From oconnort@panix.com Fri Mar 5 22:34:01 2004 Received: by dont.panix.com (8.11.6p2-a/8.8.8/PanixLC1.7) id i263Y1521119 for bananafish-outgoing; Fri, 5 Mar 2004 22:34:01 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <54470-2200436621153287@M2W057.mail2web.com> X-Priority: 3 X-Originating-IP: 130.156.1.50 X-URL: http://mail2web.com/ From: "kenny2@verizon.net" To: bananafish@roughdraft.org Subject: RE: Holden and Death Date: Fri, 5 Mar 2004 21:11:53 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 X-OriginalArrivalTime: 06 Mar 2004 02:11:53.0500 (UTC) FILETIME=[649C05C0:01C40320] Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by dont.panix.com id i262Btb18454 Sender: owner-bananafish@roughdraft.org Precedence: bulk Reply-To: bananafish@roughdraft.org Esquire Original Message: ----------------- From: ANELLO Michael J Michael.J.Anello@state.or.us Date: 05 Mar 2004 14:12:11 -0800 To: bananafish@roughdraft.org, citycabn@yahoo.com Subject: RE: Holden and Death where is this contributor's note from? -mike >>> citycabn@yahoo.com 03/03/04 06:26PM >>> At the end of 1945, in a Contributors' Note, Salinger wrote: "So far the novels of this war have had too much of the strength, maturity and craftsmanship critics are looking for, and too little of the glorious imperfections which teeter and fall off the best minds. The men who have been in this war deserve some sort of trembling melody rendered without embarrassment or regret. I'll watch out for that book." - * Unsubscribing? Mail majordomo@roughdraft.org with the message * UNSUBSCRIBE BANANAFISH -------------------------------------------------------------------- mail2web - Check your email from the web at http://mail2web.com/ . - * Unsubscribing? Mail majordomo@roughdraft.org with the message * UNSUBSCRIBE BANANAFISH From oconnort@panix.com Fri Mar 5 22:34:01 2004 Received: from localhost (localhost [[UNIX: localhost]]) by dont.panix.com (8.11.6p2-a/8.8.8/PanixLC1.7) id i263Y1g21117 for bananafish-outgoing; Fri, 5 Mar 2004 22:34:01 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <18690-2200436621041810@M2W073.mail2web.com> X-Priority: 3 X-Originating-IP: 130.156.1.50 X-URL: http://mail2web.com/ From: "kenny2@verizon.net" To: bananafish@roughdraft.org Subject: Re: Holden and Death Date: Fri, 5 Mar 2004 21:10:41 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 X-OriginalArrivalTime: 06 Mar 2004 02:10:46.0061 (UTC) FILETIME=[3C69A5D0:01C40320] Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by dont.panix.com id i262Alb18444 Sender: owner-bananafish@roughdraft.org Precedence: bulk Reply-To: bananafish@roughdraft.org But written well before publication. Madison, in fact, in early 1941. These stories account for a good portion of the novel. While the exact date of Bowling Balls is debatable, "great chunks" of this story also wound up in Catcher. The ending leads one to believe that it was written during, and not after, the war. Original Message: ----------------- From: Robin Dudley ralanya@hotmail.com Date: Fri, 05 Mar 2004 18:25:26 +0000 To: bananafish@roughdraft.org Subject: Re: Holden and Death Kenny2: Which "great chunks of the novel remain unaltered from before" Salinger's service? I am only aware of "I'm Crazy" and "Slight Rebellion," which were both published post-1944. Robin >From: "Kenneth" >Reply-To: bananafish@roughdraft.org >To: >Subject: Re: Holden and Death >Date: Thu, 4 Mar 2004 12:03:14 -0500 > >I suppose you can take a completely deconstructionist view of Catcher >regarding the war. The problem is that great chunks of the novel remain >unaltered from before and during his service. If there is a war message >there, even subliminally, you'd think that he would have written with a >frenzy immediately after the war while thoughts or "feelings" were freshest >and most compelling. Instead, he stopped writing (at least Catcher) at this >time as if to first cleanse or readjust himself in order to continue the >work. In fact, any reference to the war in Catcher appears to have been >added in very late and quite intentionally. There are a handful of portions >which are obviously added or altered for one reason or another and are easy >to discern. This is one of them. >I've also read "professional analysis" of Catcher that accuses Holden of >incestual feelings toward Phoebe. It's one thing to read this kind of stuff >for amusement, it's another to let it impact your own perceptions. > >----- Original Message ----- >From: "James Rovira" >To: >Sent: Thursday, March 04, 2004 9:40 AM >Subject: Re: Holden and Death > > > > I see the point of these critiques of Pinkser's ideas, but I think it's > > too dependent upon intentionality. Authors can map their feelings as > > well as their ideas onto their work, and Pinsker's kind of criticism > > seems to be exploring Catcher's emotional landscape rather than > > ideological. > > > > So what Salinger -thought- about the war may have been somewhat > > different from what he -felt- about it. > > > > What I would dislike about the Pinsker would be its treatment of > > literature as a kind of "secret code" of sorts ("Hold-in" "Caul-field"), > > which is more a revelation of the ingenuity of the critic than the work > > itself. But I find it hard to argue with Pinsker about Salinger's > > obsession with death or, more precisely (thanks to Bruce), the dead > > sibling. That's the driving force behind the Glass family stories. > > The Dead Seymour hovers over the entire family. > > > > Jim > > > > Kenneth wrote: > > > > >This one's outta the ballpark. And Mike, you know better. Apart from >Allie's > > >(belatedly inserted) name, there's no correlation between Cartcher and >the > > >war. First off, it was largely written during the war. Secondly, the >New > > >Yorker people badgered Salinger to write a major work about the war for > > >years after 45 and after 52. While he repeatedly remarked about >considering > > >the possibility, in the end, he decided not to. Had he done so already, >by > > >way of Catcher, wouldn't he have mentioned it? > > > > > > > - > > * Unsubscribing? Mail majordomo@roughdraft.org with the message > > * UNSUBSCRIBE BANANAFISH > > > >- >* Unsubscribing? Mail majordomo@roughdraft.org with the message >* UNSUBSCRIBE BANANAFISH _________________________________________________________________ Learn how to help protect your privacy and prevent fraud online at Tech Hacks & Scams. http://special.msn.com/msnbc/techsafety.armx - * Unsubscribing? Mail majordomo@roughdraft.org with the message * UNSUBSCRIBE BANANAFISH -------------------------------------------------------------------- mail2web - Check your email from the web at http://mail2web.com/ . - * Unsubscribing? Mail majordomo@roughdraft.org with the message * UNSUBSCRIBE BANANAFISH From oconnort@panix.com Fri Mar 5 23:31:28 2004 Received: from localhost (localhost [[UNIX: localhost]]) by dont.panix.com (8.11.6p2-a/8.8.8/PanixLC1.7) id i264VSx23610 for bananafish-outgoing; Fri, 5 Mar 2004 23:31:28 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <404950AE.2080205@drew.edu> Date: Fri, 05 Mar 2004 23:16:46 -0500 From: James Rovira User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.4) Gecko/20030624 Netscape/7.1 (ax) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: bananafish@roughdraft.org Subject: Re: Questioning Question Marks References: In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-bananafish@roughdraft.org Precedence: bulk Reply-To: bananafish@roughdraft.org I meant what I wrote as an addition to what you were suggesting, not in place of it. Different things are happening with different uses. I suspect that most people these days, when beginning a sentence with the words "I wonder," understand that sentence to be a question. Jim L. Manning Vines wrote: >Jim writes: ><< "Wonder" as an experience has become so linked to the process of >questioning, in our thinking, that it's common to use it in a sentence to >introduce a question. >> > >This is a sensible hypothesis, too, though I'm not yet persuaded by it. > >When I write the sentence "I wonder if our question mark is headed this >way?" or when I say this sentence with the yes/no-question intonation, I >don't think that I'm asking a question. I suppose you might argue that I am >asking a rhetorical question (I certainly anticipate no answer, even if I am >inviting response) but I doubt even this. I am not registering it as a >question, at least. > >Though perhaps "question," in the sense that justifies this punctuation, is >only the invitation to response. In this case the mark need not be becoming >an indicator of pitch, and neither need the words "I wonder" be becoming a >question-introducer. We have questions that are asked and "questions" that >are actually simple declaratives inviting a response, and both can take this >punctuation. > >-Robbie >- >* Unsubscribing? Mail majordomo@roughdraft.org with the message >* UNSUBSCRIBE BANANAFISH > > > - * Unsubscribing? Mail majordomo@roughdraft.org with the message * UNSUBSCRIBE BANANAFISH From oconnort@panix.com Sat Mar 6 01:04:49 2004 Received: by dont.panix.com (8.11.6p2-a/8.8.8/PanixLC1.7) id i2664nB27089 for bananafish-outgoing; Sat, 6 Mar 2004 01:04:49 -0500 (EST) X-Originating-IP: [63.167.237.65] X-Originating-Email: [lmanningvines@hotmail.com] X-Sender: lmanningvines@hotmail.com From: "L. Manning Vines" To: Subject: Re: Holden and Death Date: Sat, 6 Mar 2004 00:08:01 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1158 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1165 Message-ID: X-OriginalArrivalTime: 06 Mar 2004 05:08:02.0754 (UTC) FILETIME=[00603220:01C40339] Sender: owner-bananafish@roughdraft.org Precedence: bulk Reply-To: bananafish@roughdraft.org Kenneth writes: << If there is a war message [in Catcher], even subliminally, you'd think that he would have written with a frenzy immediately after the war while thoughts or "feelings" were freshest and most compelling. Instead, he stopped writing (at least Catcher) at this time as if to first cleanse or readjust himself in order to continue the work. >> I don't know about any "war message," but I don't think that one ought to expect the effect of war on one's life and writing to be relegated to, or even most acutely felt, while it remains freshest in the memory. I find quite the opposite to be true, in fact, for personal times of trauma. Certainly the effect of a loved-one's sudden death or some other traumatic experience can continue to be dramatic, even becoming more profound with the passing years. Indeed, if one finds oneself to be forever altered by an event, it seems reasonable to expect that the more one grows in his changed form the more vivid the profundity of the experience may become. It seems to me, for instance, that Buddy feels and understands the effect of Seymour's suicide more and more as the years and his writing go on (and that he sees this himself when he looks back to the things he wrote when the wound was freshest, as to APDFBF from S:AI). I expect this to be just as true of war. -Robbie - * Unsubscribing? Mail majordomo@roughdraft.org with the message * UNSUBSCRIBE BANANAFISH From oconnort@panix.com Sat Mar 6 01:04:49 2004 Received: from localhost (localhost [[UNIX: localhost]]) by dont.panix.com (8.11.6p2-a/8.8.8/PanixLC1.7) id i2664nu27088 for bananafish-outgoing; Sat, 6 Mar 2004 01:04:49 -0500 (EST) X-Originating-IP: [63.167.237.65] X-Originating-Email: [lmanningvines@hotmail.com] X-Sender: lmanningvines@hotmail.com From: "L. Manning Vines" To: Subject: Re: In Defense of the Associate Professor Date: Fri, 5 Mar 2004 23:46:12 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1158 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1165 Message-ID: X-OriginalArrivalTime: 06 Mar 2004 04:46:13.0248 (UTC) FILETIME=[F3D97000:01C40335] Sender: owner-bananafish@roughdraft.org Precedence: bulk Reply-To: bananafish@roughdraft.org Jim writes: << I don't think [Will] saw a distinction between the use of words offensive to him and ridicule or pejorative [. . . .] You know, of course, that a member of a group using a word to describe the group, as opposed to a non-member, are completely different beasts, right? >> You could certainly be correct that Will sees no distinction between using such a word on the one hand and ridicule or pejorative on the other -- certainly he seems to think that using such a word, even without a shade of mean-spiritedness, is unacceptable for "non-members," as you put it. I received a private email from him after my last message to the list (which was forwarded to him by one of his students), and out of deference to him I will not speak of its specifics; but I hope he does not mind my saying here that he used language and leveled charges that I doubt he would have used or leveled if he saw and recognized the ethnic origin of my own surname. (It isn't actually Vines, of course.) Certainly the distinction you make between the use of such a word by members and by non-members of the named group is often a vivid one, but I think it is more complex than a simple member/non-member dichotomy and involves the openness to one another of involved individuals. This is depicted, for example, in a scene in Jonathan Kesselman's rather stupid movie "The Hebrew Hammer" (a spoof of 70s "blaxsploitation" movies like "Shaft" and others, this time with a Jewish hero) that depicts two men fondly addressing one another, to the shock of on-lookers, as "my kike" and "my nigga," respectively. I remembered a different post than the one you mention as provoking Will's departure, though I think you might be right and the post I had in mind was in the discussion that followed -- or perhaps it was from a separate discussion altogether. This post referred not only to atheists and Jews, but also to Indian and Chinese people (maybe the post you mention did too, come to think of it), and explicitly referred to old friends thusly affiliated and, if I remember correctly, to Scottie's fondness for them. It seemed to me rather clear that the words were used without malice, and quite in the spirit of the use in Kesselman's movie. Maybe the potency of the words justifies a claim that their use is in almost every case gratuitous and crude, that a thoughtful person simply doesn't use them. Though perhaps it is also worth noting that, judging by the numbers Tim has occasionally given us concerning bananafish subscriptions, I am probably not the only reader who shares Will's ethnic affiliation and I don't recall anybody else responding as he did. I should point out that while I clearly do not need to defend anyone's right to use such language, neither do I care to defend the decency of it. I myself am unoffended by it and I know that this is not unusual. Nevertheless, it remains that some people are very offended by it, and so angered that they will introduce hostility and malice to a conversation where previously there was none (and even introduce it again when the memory is revived much later). Maybe thoughtful people don't use such language. Debating whether one ought or ought not to become offended, or whether one ought or ought not to avoid such language for sake of those who will become offended, will probably be unhelpful and uninteresting. My suggestion is that, when referring to a specific case, we refer to it accurately, with prejudice against neither the offended nor the offender. To suggest that Will left subsequent to "ridicule" or "personal attacks" or anything similar is, as I see it, simply to suggest an untruth, and to malign one of our regular contributors. Will left subsequent to Scottie's using a word that enraged him. By saying this I am neither endorsing nor condemning his response to Scottie's language, and neither asserting nor denying the civility or decency or thoughtfulness of Scottie's language. I am only claiming that, when invoking a particular case, explicitly or implicitly, we ought not to let the transgressions of any party be exaggerated, and that I think this is precisely what has happened in this case. And Tim writes: << It's good to engage you in discussion, Robbie ... I feel as if it keeps us honest. >> Thank you very much, Tim. Your response, as usual, is well-reasoned and fair. I agree with your sense that we ought to avoid things like "personal attacks," "personal vendettas" and "pointless venom," though I also have the sense that we see remarkably little of that here. What we sometimes see called a personal attack is much more often, it seems to me, playful ribbing (and sometimes less even than that); perhaps we ought to be mindful of those who seem to be especially sensitive to teasing, or to have a hard time recognizing the absence of malice (or who will be exceptionally offended by certain language, whether used with malice or not), though, as you suggest, neither is it desirable for a community to be overly cautious and delicate. My suggestion here is merely that it is a further detriment to the community to make accusations of hostility or ridicule when, in the particular case invoked, the accused is guilty of no charge greater than insensitivity. -Robbie - * Unsubscribing? Mail majordomo@roughdraft.org with the message * UNSUBSCRIBE BANANAFISH From oconnort@panix.com Sat Mar 6 10:24:46 2004 Received: by dont.panix.com (8.11.6p2-a/8.8.8/PanixLC1.7) id i26FOko13888 for bananafish-outgoing; Sat, 6 Mar 2004 10:24:46 -0500 (EST) From: Omlor@aol.com Message-ID: <55.524d05b0.2d7b28c4@aol.com> Date: Sat, 6 Mar 2004 08:14:44 EST Subject: Updike talks tonight To: bananafish@roughdraft.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="part1_55.524d05b0.2d7b28c4_boundary" X-Mailer: 6.0 sub 10581 Sender: owner-bananafish@roughdraft.org Precedence: bulk Reply-To: bananafish@roughdraft.org --part1_55.524d05b0.2d7b28c4_boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hi all, John Updike gives a rare television interview tonight, at 7 pm (check local times) on The History Channel. He talks about his own work, about other writers, about being 71 ("I look in the mirror expecting to see somebody else..."), and offers the secret of a great literary career ("It's a matter of patience. Sitting ability, really..."). Meanwhile, the qualifying round for my club championship is held today. Keep my golf game in your hearts. All the best, --John --part1_55.524d05b0.2d7b28c4_boundary Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hi all,

John Updike gives a rare television interview tonight, at 7 pm (check lo= cal times) on The History Channel.  He talks about his own work, about=20= other writers, about being 71 ("I look in the mirror expecting to see somebo= dy else..."), and offers the secret of a great literary career ("It's a matt= er of patience. Sitting ability, really...").

Meanwhile, the qualifying round for my club championship is held today.=20=  Keep my golf game in your hearts.

All the best,

--John --part1_55.524d05b0.2d7b28c4_boundary-- - * Unsubscribing? Mail majordomo@roughdraft.org with the message * UNSUBSCRIBE BANANAFISH From oconnort@panix.com Sat Mar 6 10:24:46 2004 Received: from localhost (localhost [[UNIX: localhost]]) by dont.panix.com (8.11.6p2-a/8.8.8/PanixLC1.7) id i26FOko13882 for bananafish-outgoing; Sat, 6 Mar 2004 10:24:46 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <007d01c4034f$a77244c0$1ba57dc2@j8l6n9> From: "Scottie Bowman" To: References: <25.450dd783.2d7a962b@aol.com> Subject: Re: Faulkner re JDS Date: Sat, 6 Mar 2004 07:50:10 -0000 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Sender: owner-bananafish@roughdraft.org Precedence: bulk Reply-To: bananafish@roughdraft.org '... hypnotizing. Or horrifying ...' Not much doubt which. I wonder could we term this the Nobel Effect (will he, won't he interrogate?) The language reminded me of nothing so much as Ernie's address to the nations the night he sent his deputy along to pick up the medal. These guys spend their lives writing about the particulars, but send them to Stockholm & they'll immediately take a ponderous step back & start blowing hot air about 'Man', 'God', 'The Writer' ... usw Scottie B. - * Unsubscribing? Mail majordomo@roughdraft.org with the message * UNSUBSCRIBE BANANAFISH From oconnort@panix.com Sat Mar 6 10:24:46 2004 Received: by dont.panix.com (8.11.6p2-a/8.8.8/PanixLC1.7) id i26FOkD13887 for bananafish-outgoing; Sat, 6 Mar 2004 10:24:46 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <4049C925.1090701@drew.edu> Date: Sat, 06 Mar 2004 07:50:45 -0500 From: James Rovira User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.4) Gecko/20030624 Netscape/7.1 (ax) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: bananafish@roughdraft.org Subject: Re: In Defense of the Associate Professor References: In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-bananafish@roughdraft.org Precedence: bulk Reply-To: bananafish@roughdraft.org Short responses below: L. Manning Vines wrote: >Certainly the distinction you make between the use of such a word by members >and by non-members of the named group is often a vivid one, but I think it >is more complex than a simple member/non-member dichotomy and involves the >openness to one another of involved individuals. This is depicted, for >example, in a scene in Jonathan Kesselman's rather stupid movie "The Hebrew >Hammer" (a spoof of 70s "blaxsploitation" movies like "Shaft" and others, >this time with a Jewish hero) that depicts two men fondly addressing one >another, to the shock of on-lookers, as "my kike" and "my nigga," >respectively. > Ha. I saw that film. Funny. Of course you're accurately describing something that does indeed happen, and happens by agreement between the two parties. No such agreement existed between Will and Scottie, though, and Scottie's words weren't actually directed specifically at Will. So I agree with you that different configurations of this exchange are possible. I suspect we'd both agree that no such configuration existed in this case. >My suggestion is that, when referring to a specific case, we refer to it >accurately, with prejudice against neither the offended nor the offender. >To suggest that Will left subsequent to "ridicule" or "personal attacks" or >anything similar is, as I see it, simply to suggest an untruth, and to >malign one of our regular contributors. Will left subsequent to Scottie's >using a word that enraged him. By saying this I am neither endorsing nor >condemning his response to Scottie's language, and neither asserting nor >denying the civility or decency or thoughtfulness of Scottie's language. I >am only claiming that, when invoking a particular case, explicitly or >implicitly, we ought not to let the transgressions of any party be >exaggerated, and that I think this is precisely what has happened in this >case. > What I would suggest is that rather than thinking this specific case can be referred to "accurately" (which to me implies a single point of view), we recognize that there is more than one point of view possible (Will's, who understands any such use of that word in his presence as perjorative to him personally), and Scottie's, who I think never intended anything of the sort, and was actually including himself in the pejorative. I think you're right about the mention of Asians too. I'd forgotten that. I can only wonder what listmembers who weren't around at the time are thinking right now :). (unselfconsciously written with no question mark!) Jim - * Unsubscribing? Mail majordomo@roughdraft.org with the message * UNSUBSCRIBE BANANAFISH From oconnort@panix.com Sat Mar 6 13:59:06 2004 Received: from localhost (localhost [[UNIX: localhost]]) by dont.panix.com (8.11.6p2-a/8.8.8/PanixLC1.7) id i26Ix6u19908 for bananafish-outgoing; Sat, 6 Mar 2004 13:59:06 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <4049ED6C.4000603@drew.edu> Date: Sat, 06 Mar 2004 10:25:32 -0500 From: James Rovira User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.4) Gecko/20030624 Netscape/7.1 (ax) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: bananafish@roughdraft.org Subject: Whuppin' on that dead horse somemore Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Sender: owner-bananafish@roughdraft.org Precedence: bulk Reply-To: bananafish@roughdraft.org From the AAUP -- American Association of University Professors. Washington, D.C. — The AAUP's Committee A on Academic Freedom and Tenure has adopted the following statement responding to the invitation of "Students for Academic Freedom" calling on students to report professors who try to "impose their political opinions" in the classroom. The advertised call rests on a right, claimed in the name of academic freedom, not to be confronted with controversy in the classroom. (http://www.aaup.org/statements/SpchState/comaclass.htm) Controversy in the Classroom A statement issued by the AAUP's Committee A on Academic Freedom and Tenure Advertisements have appeared in the campus press by an organization, "Students for Academic Freedom," calling on students to report professors who try to "impose their political opinions" in the classroom. This is not the first time that self-appointed watchdogs of classroom utterances have focused on the professoriate: The John Birch Society undertook that role in the 1960s, an organization called "Accuracy in Academia" did so in the 1980s, and "Campus Watch" assumed that role for professors of Middle Eastern studies after September 11, 2001. What is different is that this organization purports to rely on AAUP principles in condemning the introduction of "controversial matter having no relation to the subject" and to take upon itself the mission of defining what is in and out of bounds. The AAUP has long maintained that instructors should avoid the persistent intrusion of matter, controversial or not, that has no bearing on the subject of instruction. Any such practice would be expected to be taken up as part of the regular evaluations of teaching routinely conducted in higher education, evaluations that commonly include surveys of student experience. The advertised call goes well beyond a concern for poor pedagogy, however. It rests on a right, claimed in the name of academic freedom, not to be confronted with controversy in the classroom—not, at least, beyond what the organization conceives of as germane to the subject as defined by it. The project's stated purpose, as its ad puts it, is to rule out of bounds any reference to the war in Iraq in a course whose "subject" is not the war in Iraq, or statements about George W. Bush in a course that is not about "contemporary American presidents, presidential administrations or some similar subject." Controversy is often at the heart of instruction; good teaching is often served by referring to contemporary controversies even if only to stimulate student interest and debate. If these watchdogs have their way, a professor of classics, history, ethics, or even museum administration could make no reference to the Iraq conflict or to George Bush—in their courses on the Roman Empire, colonialism, the morality of war, or trade in the artifacts of ancient civilizations—because the "subject" of these courses is not this war or this president. Contrary to defending academic freedom, the project is inimical to it and, indeed, to the very idea of liberal education. (The American Association of University Professors is a nonprofit charitable and educational organization that promotes academic freedom by supporting tenure, academic due process, and standards of quality in higher education. The AAUP has 45,000 members at colleges and universities throughout the United States.) - * Unsubscribing? Mail majordomo@roughdraft.org with the message * UNSUBSCRIBE BANANAFISH From oconnort@panix.com Sat Mar 6 17:10:03 2004 Received: by dont.panix.com (8.11.6p2-a/8.8.8/PanixLC1.7) id i26MA3D25168 for bananafish-outgoing; Sat, 6 Mar 2004 17:10:03 -0500 (EST) From: "Tim O'Connor" To: bananafish Subject: Re: In Defense of the Associate Professor Date: Sat, 6 Mar 2004 17:09:13 -0500 Message-Id: <20040306220913.4661@mail.panix.com> In-Reply-To: <4049C925.1090701@drew.edu> References: <4049C925.1090701@drew.edu> X-Mailer: CTM PowerMail 4.2.1 us Carbon MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-bananafish@roughdraft.org Precedence: bulk Reply-To: bananafish@roughdraft.org On Sat, Mar 6, 2004, jrovira@drew.edu said: >I can only wonder what listmembers who weren't around at the time are >thinking right now :). They can only think that we are lunatics, and that we do nothing about Salinger. --tim - * Unsubscribing? Mail majordomo@roughdraft.org with the message * UNSUBSCRIBE BANANAFISH From oconnort@panix.com Sat Mar 6 17:10:02 2004 Received: from localhost (localhost [[UNIX: localhost]]) by dont.panix.com (8.11.6p2-a/8.8.8/PanixLC1.7) id i26MA2G25167 for bananafish-outgoing; Sat, 6 Mar 2004 17:10:02 -0500 (EST) From: Omlor@aol.com Message-ID: <4a.28bdda28.2d7ba06c@aol.com> Date: Sat, 6 Mar 2004 16:45:16 EST Subject: Re: Whuppin' on that dead horse somemore To: bananafish@roughdraft.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="part1_4a.28bdda28.2d7ba06c_boundary" X-Mailer: 6.0 sub 10581 Sender: owner-bananafish@roughdraft.org Precedence: bulk Reply-To: bananafish@roughdraft.org --part1_4a.28bdda28.2d7ba06c_boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Jim, RE: "...calling on students to report professors..." In the words of our beloved emperor: "Bring 'em on." --John --part1_4a.28bdda28.2d7ba06c_boundary Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Jim,

RE: "...calling on students to report professors..."

In the words of our beloved emperor:

"Bring 'em on."

--John
--part1_4a.28bdda28.2d7ba06c_boundary-- - * Unsubscribing? Mail majordomo@roughdraft.org with the message * UNSUBSCRIBE BANANAFISH From oconnort@panix.com Sat Mar 6 19:44:33 2004 Received: from localhost (localhost [[UNIX: localhost]]) by dont.panix.com (8.11.6p2-a/8.8.8/PanixLC1.7) id i270iXF29729 for bananafish-outgoing; Sat, 6 Mar 2004 19:44:33 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <404A67D1.2020406@drew.edu> Date: Sat, 06 Mar 2004 19:07:45 -0500 From: James Rovira User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.4) Gecko/20030624 Netscape/7.1 (ax) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: bananafish@roughdraft.org Subject: Re: Whuppin' on that dead horse somemore References: <4a.28bdda28.2d7ba06c@aol.com> In-Reply-To: <4a.28bdda28.2d7ba06c@aol.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-bananafish@roughdraft.org Precedence: bulk Reply-To: bananafish@roughdraft.org John -- There's just a brownshirts feel to the whole thing, you know? I think it's perfectly legit for students to register any complaints they want in course evaluations, and if there's some kind of thought policing going on in the classroom, that is a problem, but I don't see thought policing as the solution to thought policing. Tim -- ah, but there have been plenty of Salinger posts lately, though, thanks to Bruce and Michael and others....So hopefully they'd just be thinking we were lunatics. Jim Omlor@aol.com wrote: > Jim, > > RE: "...calling on students to report professors..." > > In the words of our beloved emperor: > > "Bring 'em on." > > --John - * Unsubscribing? Mail majordomo@roughdraft.org with the message * UNSUBSCRIBE BANANAFISH From oconnort@panix.com Sat Mar 6 20:04:27 2004 Received: from localhost (localhost [[UNIX: localhost]]) by dont.panix.com (8.11.6p2-a/8.8.8/PanixLC1.7) id i2714RH00475 for bananafish-outgoing; Sat, 6 Mar 2004 20:04:27 -0500 (EST) From: "Tim O'Connor" To: bananafish Subject: Re: Whuppin' on that dead horse somemore Date: Sat, 6 Mar 2004 20:03:47 -0500 Message-Id: <20040307010347.17290@mail.panix.com> In-Reply-To: <404A67D1.2020406@drew.edu> References: <404A67D1.2020406@drew.edu> X-Mailer: CTM PowerMail 4.2.1 us Carbon MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-bananafish@roughdraft.org Precedence: bulk Reply-To: bananafish@roughdraft.org On Sat, Mar 6, 2004, jrovira@drew.edu said: >Tim -- ah, but there have been plenty of Salinger posts lately, though, >thanks to Bruce and Michael and others....So hopefully they'd just be >thinking we were lunatics. I was sort of pulling your leg there, Jim. Of COURSE they think we are lunatics. We act like them, we talk like them, we reason like them, and we walk like them. Signed, Proud to be a lunatic, Tim - * Unsubscribing? Mail majordomo@roughdraft.org with the message * UNSUBSCRIBE BANANAFISH From oconnort@panix.com Sun Mar 7 09:41:17 2004 Received: from localhost (localhost [[UNIX: localhost]]) by dont.panix.com (8.11.6p2-a/8.8.8/PanixLC1.7) id i27EfHm24362 for bananafish-outgoing; Sun, 7 Mar 2004 09:41:17 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <24960452.1078642043220.JavaMail.root@statler.psp.pas.earthlink.net> Date: Sun, 7 Mar 2004 01:47:22 -0500 (GMT-05:00) From: Luke Smith To: bananafish@roughdraft.org Subject: Re: Whuppin' on that dead horse somemore Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 X-Mailer: Earthlink Zoo Mail 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by dont.panix.com id i276lPb10584 Sender: owner-bananafish@roughdraft.org Precedence: bulk Reply-To: bananafish@roughdraft.org Horowitz's reply to the AAUP: The Professors' Orwellian Case By David Horowitz FrontPageMagazine.com | December 5, 2003 The American Association of University Professors prides itself on being a guardian of academic freedom. There is a sound historical basis for this pride beginning with its famous report of 1915, which launched the academic freedom tradition. Through the 1970s its Academic Freedom Committee developed principles and guidelines that have been adopted by American universities to protect the intellectual independence of their faculties. As early as the 1915 report, the AAUP also recognized the academic freedom rights of students. However, as a guild organization whose members are professors, it is not surprising that the AAUP has not been so mindful of the academic rights of students, although these rights are mentioned in its pronouncements going to back to the original report. Again, not surprisingly, the same is true of university administrations, whose academic freedom policies are generally modeled on AAUP guidelines. Worse, when student rights have been widely infringed by faculty and university administrations, the AAUP has tended to overlook the infringements and even defend them. This is not a small problem. Under the name “political correctness,” student speech rights have been curtailed and students’ academic freedoms abused on an unprecedented scale. Courses of indoctrination masquerading as education have spread through the curriculum and become familiar objects of public ridicule. Outrage over political correctness and “speech codes,” however, did not come from the AAUP or academic faculties, but from the public at large. Moreover, curbing these excesses has been the work of legislatures and the courts, more than academic institutions or associations. Nor are the problems of professorial excess absent to day. This year, for example, a criminology class at a Colorado university was given an assignment to write a paper on “Why George Bush Is A War Criminal.” Bad enough. But a student who chose to submit a paper on “Why Saddam Hussein Is A War Criminal” received a failing grade (for political incorrectness). At Augustana University, a Lutheran private college, a student was attacked by his own professor and called a “neo-fascist” in front of his classmates for the sin of inviting a FoxNews Channel host to speak on the campus. At Metro State College in Denver, a student who was a Special Forces instructor and had served his country in Panama, the Gulf War, Somalia, Afghanistan and Iraq was told by his professor that he was a “racist” and “violent” and that his uniform was an “offense to the class.” At Texas University, students complained about a professors who used their classrooms as political soapboxes, including one journalism professor who instead of teaching journalistic methods lectured on racism, the war in Iraq and ruling class control of the media. I myself attended a class in “Modern Industrial Societies” at Bates College a few years ago, in which the sole text was a 500-page tract put together by the editors of New Left Review with a range of authorities restricted to Marxists. When I asked the professor about the educational appropriateness of so one-sided a text, she replied “They get the other side from the newspapers.” Finally, a series of recent studies by independent researchers has shown that on any given university faculty in America, professors to the left of the political center outnumber professors to the right of the political center by a factor of 10-1 and more. At some elite schools like Brown and Wesleyan the ratio rises to 28-1 and 30-1. Even assuming a skew resulting from the career choices of individuals who share certain values along this spectrum, a 10-1 ratio indicates a greater bias than any random process would lead one to expect. But even if one were to accept the 10-1 ratio as indication of a fair hiring process, how would one then explain the 30-1 figure at Brown, without reference to hiring bias? Yet neither the Brown Administration nor the American Association of University Professors, nor any academic association has thus far indicated the slightest interest in -- let alone concern about -- these troubling facts. In this educational climate, it seemed like a reasonable idea to devise an Academic Bill of Rights that would focus on student academic rights, while protecting the integrity of academic institutions. Consulting with several academics, both conservative and liberal, therefore, I drew up a formal bill based on the tradition of academic freedom that had been articulated by the American Association of University Professors in its better days. The bill, which is sponsored by the national organization of Students for Academic Freedom, emphasizes the importance of intellectual diversity to a free education and codifies protections for students that are currently being systematically neglected. The bill was initially designed for adoption by university administrations but was also made available to legislators, several of whom – including Colorado Senate Majority Leader John K. Andrews and U.S. Representative Jack Kingston, R-GA, have taken steps to make the bill law. About all these developments the AAUP remained silent until I recently contacted them to solicit their support. Their statement in response airbrushes me out of the picture and addresses the issue of pending legislation based on my bill without distinguishing the two or mentioning my role. What I submitted was not proposed legislation – as their statement suggests -- but a bill that could be adopted by any university or by the AAUP itself. I had previously submitted a draft of the bill to four noted liberal academics – Stanley Fish, Michael Berube, Todd Gitlin and Philip Klinkner, as well as to Stephen Balch the head of the National Association of Scholars and to Alan Kors a noted professor and defender of individual rights. Each suggested amendments to the original draft and the bill was edited and altered to meet their concerns. With this revised bill in hand, I contacted Mary Burgan, the head of the “Committee A” – the AAUP’s Committee on Academic Freedom – and was told that they were considering it, but never heard from back from her. Finally, in response to a repeated request, I received a curt email from Jonathan Knight referring me to the AAUP website, where an official AAUP statement on the bill had already been posted. A scholarly body might have been expected to respond to my request for support in the spirit it was offered, suggesting amendments to any formulations in the bill it found wanting or objectionable. The AAUP could have suggested different wordings of the text, or suggested that specific clauses be dropped. (In response to concerns expressed by Professor Todd Gitlin, I had dropped an entire provision from the original draft). Instead the AAUP responded with the ferocity of a partisan political body. In the words of the AAUP statement, the Academic Bill of Rights was, “a grave threat to fundamental principles of academic freedom,” and to be “stongly condemn[ed].” Instead of a reasoned, fair-minded response, the American Association of University Professors had issued an intemperate, misleading and at times incoherent denunciation of the bill itself. If any act might serve as a symbol of the problems that have beset the academy in the last thirty years – its intense politicization and partisanship and consequent loss of scholarly perspective – it is this unscholarly assault on a document whose philosophy, formulations and very conception are drawn from its own statements and positions on academic freedom arrived at over nearly a century. Ironically, it is the AAUP’s own unprincipled behavior that demonstrates the need for a constitutional restraint. The AAUP’s statement begins by attacking what it calls the bill’s requirement that “universities … maintain political pluralism.” Bad way to start. The Academic Bill of Rights calls for no such requirement and does not employ the term “political pluralism.” This is not merely a careless reading of the text; it is a substantive misrepresentation. The Academic Bill of Rights does refer to “intellectual diversity” and does so more than once. “Political pluralism” implies political balance, while “intellectual diversity” describes an attitude towards truth and the principle of free speech. The difference is crucial. Political balance implies political interference (to correct any imbalance); by contrast, intellectual diversity calls for intellectual standards to replace the existing political ones. Having thoroughly confused the principle that the Academic Bill of Rights proposes, the AAUP characterizes the proposal as “an improper and dangerous method for [the] implementation” of the principle. It then dismisses the problem of infringements on academic freedom by declaring that current protections “work well” and therefore the bill is “not only … redundant, but also infringes academic freedom in the very act of purporting to protect it.” In other words, we already have the protections you are proposing and, by the way, as proposed by you these protections are actually threats. The AAUP then elaborates its conclusion by continuing to distort what the bill actually says. “The proposed Academic Bill of Rights directs universities to enact guidelines implementing the principle of neutrality [the AAUP’s own term, not one found in the bill] by requiring that colleges and universities appoint faculty ‘with a view toward fostering a plurality of methodologies and perspectives.’ The danger of such guidelines is that they invite diversity to be measured by political standards that diverge from the academic criteria of the scholarly profession.” The Academic Bill of Rights does no such thing. It expressly rules out measuring anything in the university by political standards. Article 1 of the bill states quite clearly, “No faculty shall be hired or fired or denied promotion or tenure on the basis of his or her political or religious beliefs.” In other words, the bill forbids use of the very political categories that the AAUP claims it invites. Having created this straw man, the AAUP then proceeds to demolish it: “No department of political theory ought to be obligated to establish ‘a plurality of methodologies and perspectives’ by appointing a professor of Nazi political philosophy, if that philosophy is not deemed a reasonable scholarly option within the discipline of political theory.” But Article 1 of the Academic Bill of Rights explicitly states, that “all faculty should be hired, fired and promoted and granted tenure on the basis of their competence and appropriate knowledge in their fields of expertise.” There is no excuse for such slovenly reading of a text under attack. If even the AAUP can’t be counted on to fairly represent a viewpoint with which it disagrees, how can it be so sanguine that the faculty it represents can be relied on to police itself? Over and over, the AAUP statement implies that political standards are going to be substituted for academic standards under the Academic Bill of Rights. “Advocates for the Academic Bill of Rights …make clear that they seek to enforce a kind of diversity that is instead determined by essentially political categories, like the number of Republicans or Democrats on a faculty, or the number of conservatives or liberals.” But as already noted, this is categorically false. The first article of the Academic Bill of Rights explicitly forbids the use of political categories in appointing faculty, which rules out enforcing diversity through such standards. The AAUP argument stands the reality on its head. The reality is that the Academic Bill of Rights is an anti-quota bill; its intention is to remove the political quotas that exist at the present time, not to institute new ones, which it expressly forbids. The Academic Bill of Rights does not threaten true academic standards or decision-making. It merely codifies the principles of academic freedom with which the AAUP says it agrees. Here is the way the Academic Bill of Rights formulates faculty responsibility for establishing a pluralism of views, for example: “Exposing students to the spectrum of significant scholarly viewpoints on the subjects examined in their courses is a major responsibility of faculty.” The operative phrase is “significant scholarly viewpoints.” What is it that the AAUP doesn’t understand about these words? And why does it insist on representing the Academic Bill of Rights as advocating the opposite of what it says? The distortion continues and is compounded: “Because there is in fact little correlation between these political categories and disciplinary standing, the assessment of faculty by such explicitly political criteria, whether used by faculty, university administrations, or the state, would profoundly corrupt the academic integrity of universities. Indeed, it would violate the neutrality principle itself.” In addition to misrepresenting what the Academic Bill of Rights proposes – the bill does not promote the assessment of faculty by political criteria but forbids it – the AAUP statement ignores its own reality. In American universities today there is actually a huge correlation between political categories and academic standing. The Academic Bill of Rights is designed to correct this corruption of academic integrity, which the AAUP has been content to preside over and defend. The AAUP indictment goes on, as repetitious as it is inaccurate, asserting that “the bill seeks to distinguish indoctrination from appropriate pedagogy by applying principles other than relevant scholarly standards, as interpreted and applied by the academic profession.” The short answer is that it does not, and no evidence is supplied by the AAUP to suggest that it does. Repetition does not make a fiction true. In addition to its false allegation that the Academic Bill of Rights attempts to introduce political criteria into academic judgments, the AAUP statement charges that it would transfer existing academic responsibilities to college administrators and the courts. But the Academic Bill of Rights does not do this any more than is already done through existing employment contracts and affirmative action procedures. Any contested tenure decision is likely to wind up in the courts, while a vast apparatus of quasi-judicial procedures involving university administrations in oversight of the classroom has been set up to comply with federal laws on discrimination and “diversity” imperatives adopted under pressure from special interest groups. Has the AAUP declared that racial diversity programs are a “grave threat to fundamental principles of academic freedom,” because they remove some autonomy from academic faculties? More disconcerting than its inconsistency on basic issues of academic governance, is the AAUP’s incoherence on the philosophical underpinnings of academic freedom. The AAUP statement singles out a phrase in the Academic Bill of Rights which refers to “the uncertainty and unsettled character of all human knowledge,” and claims that “this premise … is antithetical to the basic scholarly enterprise of the university, which is to establish and transmit knowledge.” This statement is a puzzling to say the least. Major schools of thought in the contemporary academy – post-modernism, deconstructionism, and pragmatism to name three – are anti-foundationalist in their epistemologies and build their disciplines on exactly the premise that knowledge is uncertain and even relative. Has the AAUP condemned post-modernism as a threat to scholarship? Why, moreover, should there be a conflict between regarding knowledge as “unsettled” and also transmitting it? Does knowledge have to reflect absolute truth in order to be knowledge? Doesn’t the purpose of the university encompass the pursuit of knowledge in addition to its transmission? Can it be said that scholars in any field agree on all issues in their field? On most issues? What interpretive issues in the field of English literature, History, Sociology, the Law – for example -- could be said to be universally agreed on by scholars in the field? Probably none. Are there no outstanding unsolved issues even in the scientific disciplines, to take the most difficult case. What can the AAUP be thinking? The AAUP statement continues with a hairsplitting distinction and another false assertion: “Although academic freedom rests on the principle that knowledge is mutable and open to revision, an Academic Bill of Rights that reduces all knowledge to uncertain and unsettled opinion, and which proclaims that all opinions are equally valid, negates an essential function of university education.” First the split hair: What is the difference between the statement that “knowledge is mutable and open to revision” (the AAUP’s formulation) and the Academic Bill of Rights statement that human knowledge is unsettled, i.e., that claims to absolute truth are to be treated with skepticism? There is none, and the AAUP’s assertion of the contrary is nothing more than sophistry. Now the falsehood: “[The Academic Bill of Rights] proclaims that all opinions are equally valid.” It absolutely does not proclaim any such thing -- another pure AAUP invention. Nor does the statement that human knowledge is open to challenge imply that every challenge is worthy of consideration, as the AAUP states. That would be absurd and there is nothing in the Academic Bill of Rights to suggest it. In fact, as already noted, the Academic Bill of Rights states quite the opposite: “Exposing students to the spectrum of significant scholarly viewpoints on the subjects examined in their courses is a major faculty responsibility.” In other words, the Academic Bill of Rights specifically states that the opinions that ought to be considered should be drawn from the spectrum of significant scholarly viewpoints, not polls taken of the man in the street. Since this is explicitly stated in the Bill of Rights, one wonders again how the AAUP Academic Freedom Committee – employing scholarly and fair-minded criteria -- could have arrived at such a preposterous conclusion. Moreover, the AAUP’s claim that academic standards and established disciplines rule the academic world and that the AAUP supports them does not stand up to the slightest scrutiny. The AAUP is not on record, for example, as objecting to fields that are overtly political such as Women’s Studies, Queer Studies and Labor Studies – each of which emerged by overtly rejecting the judgments of its academic superiors and peers. If the AAUP’s standards had prevailed, programs like these, not to mention African-American studies, would never have gotten off the ground. The AAUP’s statement also analyzes legislation that is either pending or shortly to be pending in Colorado and other state legislatures, and in the U.S. Congress, which is based on the Academic Bill of Rights. The AAUP is concerned about a possible threat this legislation might pose to academic autonomy. The short answer to this is that if they or any academic institution are so concerned, there is an available remedy. By incorporating the Academic Bill of Rights into their own academic freedom guidelines, they would obviate the need for legislation and preclude any possible governmental intrusion (or, more accurately, further governmental intrusion) into academic life. Presently, however, universities to whom the Academic Bill of Rights has been proposed are taking the position that their existing academic freedom policies (which are in conformity with AAUP’s own guidelines) duplicate the protections provided in the Academic Bill of Rights, which is therefore redundant. The fact that universities like Duke and the University of Illinois, and throughout the state of Colorado, are claiming this redundancy refutes the AAUP’s argument that the Academic Bill of Rights is a threat to academic freedom. Why would universities claim to be embracing its tenets if that were the case? However, the universities are wrong in making this claim, because their academic freedom guidelines do not adequately protect students – a fact remarked on at the beginning of this argument. Moreover, since they are indeed making the (unsupportable) claim that they do include such protections – and thus refusing to consider even adopting the Academic Bill of Rights – legislators have no choice if they would defend these rights but to impose them on the universities through the law. The resistance of universities to the academic freedom protections for students guaranteed in the bill is an expression of the fundamental problem at the heart of this issue. Universities have become so ideologically conformist – both in their faculty and their administration -- that they have undermined their public credibility on these matters. If a prospective professor with politically left views has ten- or thirty-to-one advantage of being hired over a conservative, what does that say about the ability of faculties to judge in a fair-minded manner what constitutes indoctrination versus what constitutes education? How can faculties which have demonstrated such bias in the selection of their academic peers be presumed to be fair-minded in their treatment of students who are their academic inferiors? Notwithstanding this problem, the Academic Bill of Rights does not call for interference by legislatures in these matters. What it does is to set down guidelines for faculty and administrators in making such judgments. Its guidelines as the AAUP statement itself acknowledges are drawn explicitly from the AAUP’s own academic freedom policies but are extended to cover students as well. If the AAUP wishes to preclude legislative intrusion into these matters, it has a simple remedy readily available and already noted, which is to urge its members to adopt the Academic Bill of Right’s protections for students as official university policy. That would take the entire question of legislative remedies off the table. As a final matter, the AAUP statement finds article 8 of the Academic Bill of Rights especially objectionable. Article 8 states that “academic institutions and professional societies should maintain a posture of organizational neutrality with respect to the substantive disagreements that divide researchers within or outside their fields of inquiry.” The AAUP finds “the implications of this requirement…truly breathtaking.” It is hard to see why. What academic rationale can there be for a university or an academic association declaring itself against the war in Iraq for example, as more than few have done? In fact the AAUP comments on Article 8 hide through ellipses the fact that it refers to academic institutions and professional societies (rather than academic departments) and refers to disagreements within “or outside” professors’ scholarly fields of expertise. It further distorts what the bill actually says by suggesting that Article 8 refers to “judgments of quality,” which it absolutely does not. It refers only to “substantive disagreements.” This dishonest presentation of what Article 8 says is actually what it is breathtaking. What the AAUP’s distortion of the article is is intended to obscure is that it refers to issues that are politically divisive. Article 8 was actually inspired by Stanley Fish’s essay, “Save The World On Your Own Time,” which appeared in the Chronicle of Higher Education, and which argues that there is a conflict between political concerns and professional inquiry and that to protect the latter universities should remain institutionally neutral on controversial questions of the day. Perhaps Article 8 should have explained further what it mean by “substantive disagreements,” and issues “outside” the fields of professors’ scholarly expertise. If so, this could be easily fixed by revisiting the wording of the text and revising it. But the AAUP has not suggested that. Instead it has distorted the meaning of the text to suggest that decisions about academic quality should be taken away from faculties or universities. This is just another in the series of straw men that the AAUP has found it necessary to create in order to reach its Orwellian conclusion that “the Academic Bill of Rights undermines the very academic freedom it claims to support.” On the contrary, it is the partisan dishonesy of the AAUP’s assault on these missing protections that does just that. No better case could be made as to the need for academic reform than the AAUP’s own behavior in this matter. This article is a response to a statement made by the AAUP's Committee A on Academic Freedom and Tenure denouncing the Academic Bill of Rights and calling it a “grave threat to fundamental principles of academic freedom.” The author wishes to thank Professor Philip Klinkner and Stephen Balch for advice on this text. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- David Horowitz is the author of numerous books including an autobiography, Radical Son, which has been described as “the first great autobiography of his generation,” and which chronicles his odyssey from radical activism to the current positions he holds. Among his other books are The Politics of Bad Faith and The Art of Political War. The Art of Political War was described by White House political strategist Karl Rove as “the perfect guide to winning on the political battlefield.” Horowitz’s latest book, Uncivil Wars, was published in January this year, and chronicles his crusade against intolerance and racial McCarthyism on college campuses last spring. Click here to read more about David - * Unsubscribing? Mail majordomo@roughdraft.org with the message * UNSUBSCRIBE BANANAFISH From oconnort@panix.com Sun Mar 7 09:41:16 2004 Received: from localhost (localhost [[UNIX: localhost]]) by dont.panix.com (8.11.6p2-a/8.8.8/PanixLC1.7) id i27EfGs24357 for bananafish-outgoing; Sun, 7 Mar 2004 09:41:16 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <4443006.1078639220740.JavaMail.root@beaker.psp.pas.earthlink.net> Date: Sun, 7 Mar 2004 01:00:20 -0500 (GMT-05:00) From: Luke Smith To: bananafish@roughdraft.org Subject: Re: Whuppin' on that dead horse somemore Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: Earthlink Zoo Mail 1.0 Sender: owner-bananafish@roughdraft.org Precedence: bulk Reply-To: bananafish@roughdraft.org I'm not sure Students for Academic Freedom's point is that there is "a right, claimed in the name of academic freedom, not to be confronted with controvery in the classroom." If you go to their website, most of their examples deal with students whose own viewpoints are conservative creating controversy or professors making ridiculous and irrelevant segues to things like the Iraq conflict, as this statement cites as an example, when there's no reason for that topic to be brought up other than pushing their own view on it. This seems like an overreaction to me. Alas nothing from JDS comes to mind to make my post any more relevant, and yeah the horse has probably been dead a long time luke -----Original Message----- From: James Rovira Sent: Mar 6, 2004 10:25 AM To: bananafish@roughdraft.org Subject: Whuppin' on that dead horse somemore From the AAUP -- American Association of University Professors. Washington, D.C. ? The AAUP's Committee A on Academic Freedom and Tenure has adopted the following statement responding to the invitation of "Students for Academic Freedom" calling on students to report professors who try to "impose their political opinions" in the classroom. The advertised call rests on a right, claimed in the name of academic freedom, not to be confronted with controversy in the classroom. (http://www.aaup.org/statements/SpchState/comaclass.htm) Controversy in the Classroom A statement issued by the AAUP's Committee A on Academic Freedom and Tenure Advertisements have appeared in the campus press by an organization, "Students for Academic Freedom," calling on students to report professors who try to "impose their political opinions" in the classroom. This is not the first time that self-appointed watchdogs of classroom utterances have focused on the professoriate: The John Birch Society undertook that role in the 1960s, an organization called "Accuracy in Academia" did so in the 1980s, and "Campus Watch" assumed that role for professors of Middle Eastern studies after September 11, 2001. What is different is that this organization purports to rely on AAUP principles in condemning the introduction of "controversial matter having no relation to the subject" and to take upon itself the mission of defining what is in and out of bounds. The AAUP has long maintained that instructors should avoid the persistent intrusion of matter, controversial or not, that has no bearing on the subject of instruction. Any such practice would be expected to be taken up as part of the regular evaluations of teaching routinely conducted in higher education, evaluations that commonly include surveys of student experience. The advertised call goes well beyond a concern for poor pedagogy, however. It rests on a right, claimed in the name of academic freedom, not to be confronted with controversy in the classroom?not, at least, beyond what the organization conceives of as germane to the subject as defined by it. The project's stated purpose, as its ad puts it, is to rule out of bounds any reference to the war in Iraq in a course whose "subject" is not the war in Iraq, or statements about George W. Bush in a course that is not about "contemporary American presidents, presidential administrations or some similar subject." Controversy is often at the heart of instruction; good teaching is often served by referring to contemporary controversies even if only to stimulate student interest and debate. If these watchdogs have their way, a professor of classics, history, ethics, or even museum administration could make no reference to the Iraq conflict or to George Bush?in their courses on the Roman Empire, colonialism, the morality of war, or trade in the artifacts of ancient civilizations?because the "subject" of these courses is not this war or this president. Contrary to defending academic freedom, the project is inimical to it and, indeed, to the very idea of liberal education. (The American Association of University Professors is a nonprofit charitable and educational organization that promotes academic freedom by supporting tenure, academic due process, and standards of quality in higher education. The AAUP has 45,000 members at colleges and universities throughout the United States.) - * Unsubscribing? Mail majordomo@roughdraft.org with the message * UNSUBSCRIBE BANANAFISH - * Unsubscribing? Mail majordomo@roughdraft.org with the message * UNSUBSCRIBE BANANAFISH From oconnort@panix.com Sun Mar 7 09:41:16 2004 Received: from localhost (localhost [[UNIX: localhost]]) by dont.panix.com (8.11.6p2-a/8.8.8/PanixLC1.7) id i27EfG924351 for bananafish-outgoing; Sun, 7 Mar 2004 09:41:16 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <404B21A0.4040601@drew.edu> Date: Sun, 07 Mar 2004 08:20:32 -0500 From: James Rovira User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.4) Gecko/20030624 Netscape/7.1 (ax) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: bananafish@roughdraft.org Subject: Re: Updike talks tonight References: <55.524d05b0.2d7b28c4@aol.com> In-Reply-To: <55.524d05b0.2d7b28c4@aol.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-bananafish@roughdraft.org Precedence: bulk Reply-To: bananafish@roughdraft.org Anyone see this? I'd forgotten until about 7:10 -- when I turned on the set, commericals were on, and when the show came back, Updike started talking about the Rabbit books. Hope I didn't miss much -- probably just biographical/childhood stuff, eh? Overall it seemed pretty good. I found it interesting who Updike failed to mention on the US literary landscape. It's as if Toni Morrison and Annie Proulx -- or any other women -- didn't exist. Neither does Pynchon. The brouhaha over Wolfe's _A Man in Full_ was pretty interesting too. Wolfe's comment about films replacing books is nonsense, especially after this year's Academy Awards. Hollywood/England can't escape books in its filmmaking, so how is it that film can replace books? Jim Omlor@aol.com wrote: > Hi all, > > John Updike gives a rare television interview tonight, at 7 pm (check > local times) on The History Channel. He talks about his own work, > about other writers, about being 71 ("I look in the mirror expecting > to see somebody else..."), and offers the secret of a great literary > career ("It's a matter of patience. Sitting ability, really..."). > > Meanwhile, the qualifying round for my club championship is held > today. Keep my golf game in your hearts. > > All the best, > > --John - * Unsubscribing? Mail majordomo@roughdraft.org with the message * UNSUBSCRIBE BANANAFISH From oconnort@panix.com Sun Mar 7 16:48:12 2004 Received: from localhost (localhost [[UNIX: localhost]]) by dont.panix.com (8.11.6p2-a/8.8.8/PanixLC1.7) id i27LmCi08130 for bananafish-outgoing; Sun, 7 Mar 2004 16:48:12 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <404B7791.6000304@drew.edu> Date: Sun, 07 Mar 2004 14:27:13 -0500 From: James Rovira User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.4) Gecko/20030624 Netscape/7.1 (ax) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: bananafish@roughdraft.org Subject: Re: Whuppin' on that dead horse somemore References: <4443006.1078639220740.JavaMail.root@beaker.psp.pas.earthlink.net> In-Reply-To: <4443006.1078639220740.JavaMail.root@beaker.psp.pas.earthlink.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Sender: owner-bananafish@roughdraft.org Precedence: bulk Reply-To: bananafish@roughdraft.org The question, I think, who determines when there is "reason" to bring up the Iraqi war (for example), and when there is not. The last course I taught was Research Writing. We read Orwell's "Politics and the English Language" and discussed logical fallacies and some of the ideas in Aristotle's Rhetoric. Interestingly, in that article, the political bogeymen were Communist and hypothetical supporters of communism in the US, one of which Orwell imagined to be a college English professor. At the same time, though, there was some discussion of Bush speeches and students made reference to them in their papers. Technically, though, Orwell, Commuism, and Bush's rhetoric are "not the subject matter of the class." But they are relevant, real world examples of what we're discussing. Should I be censored? Ha...just noticed the next article you posted. Thanks for sending it. I'm reading it now. I think Horowitz is a bit dishonest about the origins of PC speech codes -- these aren't unilaterally imposd by professors upon students, but have been reinforced by numerous court rulings and probably supported by hate crime laws. Universities needs to respect the law at this point if for no other reason than to avoid lawsuits. He even recognizes this himself: > Any contested tenure decision is likely to wind up in the courts, while a vast apparatus of quasi-judicial procedures involving university administrations in oversight of the classroom has been set up to comply with federal laws on discrimination and “diversity” imperatives adopted under pressure from special interest groups. > So I don't see where he gets off making this kind of characterization at the beginning of his essay: >Worse, when student rights have been widely infringed by faculty and university administrations, the AAUP has tended to overlook the infringements and even defend them. This is not a small problem. Under the name “political correctness,” student speech rights have been curtailed and students’ academic freedoms abused on an unprecedented scale. Courses of indoctrination masquerading as education have spread through the curriculum and become familiar objects of public ridicule. > So in the beginning of his article university administration and faculty are all to blame for the spread of PC initiatives, while at the end he claims they're being enforced by the courts. I'd like to see where he gets his numbers, and if these numbers are reflective of all disciplines. Horowitz is being either stupid or disingenuous at this point: >“Political pluralism” implies political balance, while “intellectual diversity” describes an attitude towards truth and the principle of free speech. > Because he contextualized the need for the bill in with these words: >Finally, a series of recent studies by independent researchers has shown that on any given university faculty in America, professors to the left of the political center outnumber professors to the right of the political center by a factor of 10-1 and more. > He explicitly says in the above quotation that the problem is a lack of political diversity, so how does he expect us to believe him when he says his bill has nothing to do with "political pluralism"? Who's being Orwellian? This is a serious blind spot that he repeatedly works: > It expressly rules out measuring anything in the university by political standards. Article 1 of the bill states quite clearly, “No faculty shall be hired or fired or denied promotion or tenure on the basis of his or her political or religious beliefs.” > Very hard to take him seriously at this point since he's already defined the very need for the bill in political terms. This, while it sounds reasonable, is freaking ridiculous: >But Article 1 of the Academic Bill of Rights explicitly states, that “all faculty should be hired, fired and promoted and granted tenure on the basis of their competence and appropriate knowledge in their fields of expertise.” > Simply because any search for a full time professor in almost any field will yield at least 20 or more candidates who fit this description. So...how do you choose between them? Horowitz's bill, by demanding "intellectual diversity," will make some kind of thought policing an explicit part of the process, and one governed by the political climate. If he doesn't see how dangerous this is, he doesn't have the brains or honesty to be taken seriously on this issue. I just love his reasoning here: >There is no excuse for such slovenly reading of a text under attack. If even the AAUP can’t be counted on to fairly represent a viewpoint with which it disagrees, how can it be so sanguine that the faculty it represents can be relied on to police itself? > Let's grant that his critiques of the AAUP's reading of his Bill of Rights is on the mark. Let's say they did deliberately misread the document. Does this give him the right to generalize from this response to the attitudes of the tends of thousands of university professors across the nation? He really screws himself -- it's amazing the doublespeak this guy is capable of. He's saying, over and over again, that politics have nothing to do with the bill, but then says, once again, that politics are the problem: > In American universities today there is actually a huge correlation between political categories and academic standing. > Does he really think that he can credibly claim political diversity is not the object of the bill when he repeatedly claims that lack of political diversity is the problem in US academia? I'm going to make a judgment call here. I think he's being sincere. So I have to assume he's really very, very stupid in some ways. I would also question his "facts." Assuming that the studies to which he refers used reliable methods and surveyed a variety of disciplines, why is it so incredible that academic would be 10-1 "left" of center on the political spectrum? I'd also like to know how left and right are being defined/identified, and how far left counts? Is there a distinction made between someone who's a political moderate but, say, favors abortion on demand and someone who's voted socialist for the last 20 years? I would say the AAUP response may have been faulty in the sense that it didn't distinguish clearly enough between implications and claims. I would also agree with Horowitz that when political indoctrination is taking place, it is wrong. But I think the place to examine this, and the way to deal with this, is via student course evaluations, not state or federal legislation. You get big brother watching your ideas and you've already lost. A university professor has students for a single semester, if the students don't like him or her. We're stuck with federal and local gov'ts every time we walk out our doors. Abuses are less dangerous in the former than the latter. Jim Luke Smith wrote: >I'm not sure Students for Academic Freedom's point is that there is "a right, claimed in the name of academic freedom, not to be confronted with controvery in the classroom." > >If you go to their website, most of their examples deal with students whose own viewpoints are conservative creating controversy or professors making ridiculous and irrelevant segues to things like the Iraq conflict, as this statement cites as an example, when there's no reason for that topic to be brought up other than pushing their own view on it. > >This seems like an overreaction to me. Alas nothing from JDS comes to mind to make my post any more relevant, and yeah the horse has probably been dead a long time > >luke > > > - * Unsubscribing? Mail majordomo@roughdraft.org with the message * UNSUBSCRIBE BANANAFISH From oconnort@panix.com Sun Mar 7 22:08:26 2004 Received: from localhost (localhost [[UNIX: localhost]]) by dont.panix.com (8.11.6p2-a/8.8.8/PanixLC1.7) id i2838QO17461 for bananafish-outgoing; Sun, 7 Mar 2004 22:08:26 -0500 (EST) X-Originating-IP: [63.202.83.245] X-Originating-Email: [lmanningvines@hotmail.com] X-Sender: lmanningvines@hotmail.com From: "L. Manning Vines" To: Subject: Re: In Defense of the Associate Professor Date: Sun, 7 Mar 2004 20:40:00 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1158 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1165 Message-ID: X-OriginalArrivalTime: 08 Mar 2004 01:40:13.0721 (UTC) FILETIME=[4D144090:01C404AE] Sender: owner-bananafish@roughdraft.org Precedence: bulk Reply-To: bananafish@roughdraft.org Jim writes: << What I would suggest is that rather than thinking this specific case can be referred to "accurately" (which to me implies a single point of view), we recognize that there is more than one point of view possible (Will's, who understands any such use of that word in his presence as perjorative to him personally), and Scottie's, who I think never intended anything of the sort, and was actually including himself in the pejorative. >> I don't know why talk of accuracy should suggest to you a single point of view or some kind of impossibility, but in the way that I was using the word (which I take to be perfectly ordinary), your paragraph quoted here probably comprises a description that qualifies for the title, however rigorous a standard you please. 1- One man left in outrage at another man's use of a word that the first takes to warrant physical violence in response, though the man who used it did so without hostility. 2- One man left in response to pointless venom and ridicule on behalf of the other. It seems to me that the former description, on which we both seem to agree, is accurate for the particular case invoked (and far from denying them, rather vividly suggests the different points of view), while the latter is inaccurate and unfair. That's what I mean by "accurate," and that I take #2 to be "inaccurate" is why I spoke up in this thread. -Robbie - * Unsubscribing? Mail majordomo@roughdraft.org with the message * UNSUBSCRIBE BANANAFISH From oconnort@panix.com Mon Mar 8 13:36:12 2004 Received: by dont.panix.com (8.11.6p2-a/8.8.8/PanixLC1.7) id i28IaC820641 for bananafish-outgoing; Mon, 8 Mar 2004 13:36:12 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <404C8CCB.1010509@drew.edu> Date: Mon, 08 Mar 2004 10:10:03 -0500 From: James Rovira Organization: Drew University User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.4) Gecko/20030624 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: bananafish@roughdraft.org Subject: Re: In Defense of the Associate Professor References: In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-bananafish@roughdraft.org Precedence: bulk Reply-To: bananafish@roughdraft.org Your description of the situation in your previous post excluded Will's point of view - namely, that any use of the word is pejorative and personally offensive. In fact, I believe you said that no personal attack was involved in Scottie's comments, and that Tim was mistaken by asserting that. While we both agree that description #1 below is what happened, that's not the specific point you were taking issue with nor the point to which I was referring. Jim L. Manning Vines wrote: >Jim writes: ><< What I would suggest is that rather than thinking this specific case can >be referred to "accurately" (which to me implies a single point of view), we >recognize that there is more than one point of view possible (Will's, who >understands any such use of that word in his presence as perjorative to him >personally), and Scottie's, who I think never intended anything of the sort, >and was actually including himself in the pejorative. >> > >I don't know why talk of accuracy should suggest to you a single point of >view or some kind of impossibility, but in the way that I was using the word >(which I take to be perfectly ordinary), your paragraph quoted here probably >comprises a description that qualifies for the title, however rigorous a >standard you please. > >1- One man left in outrage at another man's use of a word that the first >takes to warrant physical violence in response, though the man who used it >did so without hostility. > >2- One man left in response to pointless venom and ridicule on behalf of the >other. > >It seems to me that the former description, on which we both seem to agree, >is accurate for the particular case invoked (and far from denying them, >rather vividly suggests the different points of view), while the latter is >inaccurate and unfair. > >That's what I mean by "accurate," and that I take #2 to be "inaccurate" is >why I spoke up in this thread. > >-Robbie >- >* Unsubscribing? Mail majordomo@roughdraft.org with the message >* UNSUBSCRIBE BANANAFISH > > > - * Unsubscribing? Mail majordomo@roughdraft.org with the message * UNSUBSCRIBE BANANAFISH From oconnort@panix.com Mon Mar 8 13:36:13 2004 Received: by dont.panix.com (8.11.6p2-a/8.8.8/PanixLC1.7) id i28IaDC20653 for bananafish-outgoing; Mon, 8 Mar 2004 13:36:13 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <200403081612.i28GCZts028734@theseus.peterson.af.mil> From: Yocum Daniel R Civ 21 CES/CEOE To: "'bananafish@roughdraft.org'" Subject: RE: Whuppin' on that dead horse somemore Date: Mon, 8 Mar 2004 16:12:25 -0000 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2657.72) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Sender: owner-bananafish@roughdraft.org Precedence: bulk Reply-To: bananafish@roughdraft.org My Sister-in-law came in this weekend to visit us during her spring break and she was full of stories about poor performing profs and she is a dean list kinda girl. Anyway, she informed me of a website called rateyourprofessor.com, I haven't seen it yet but it sounds good. I could have used it back in my day. Especially when sleuthing the names listed in the schedule as "staff" as the prof for various math classes. it took me two semesters to learn that "staff" means: can't speak English. Oh well. Daniel John -- There's just a brownshirts feel to the whole thing, you know? I think it's perfectly legit for students to register any complaints they want in course evaluations, and if there's some kind of thought policing going on in the classroom, that is a problem, but I don't see thought policing as the solution to thought policing. Tim -- ah, but there have been plenty of Salinger posts lately, though, thanks to Bruce and Michael and others....So hopefully they'd just be thinking we were lunatics. Jim - * Unsubscribing? Mail majordomo@roughdraft.org with the message * UNSUBSCRIBE BANANAFISH From oconnort@panix.com Mon Mar 8 13:36:12 2004 Received: from localhost (localhost [[UNIX: localhost]]) by dont.panix.com (8.11.6p2-a/8.8.8/PanixLC1.7) id i28IaCb20635 for bananafish-outgoing; Mon, 8 Mar 2004 13:36:12 -0500 (EST) From: Omlor@aol.com Message-ID: <4c.291ae006.2d7d4855@aol.com> Date: Sun, 7 Mar 2004 22:53:57 EST Subject: Re: In Defense of the Associate Professor To: bananafish@roughdraft.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="part1_4c.291ae006.2d7d4855_boundary" X-Mailer: 6.0 sub 10581 Sender: owner-bananafish@roughdraft.org Precedence: bulk Reply-To: bananafish@roughdraft.org --part1_4c.291ae006.2d7d4855_boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hi there, I'm staying out of the whole "why Will left" stuff, since I have no horse in that particular derby. But I did just want to say that I loved Robbie's phrase, "perfectly ordinary." --John --part1_4c.291ae006.2d7d4855_boundary Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hi there,=20

I'm staying out of the whole "why Will left" stuff, since I have no hors= e in that particular derby.  But I did just want to say that I loved Ro= bbie's phrase, "perfectly ordinary."

--John

--part1_4c.291ae006.2d7d4855_boundary-- - * Unsubscribing? Mail majordomo@roughdraft.org with the message * UNSUBSCRIBE BANANAFISH From oconnort@panix.com Mon Mar 8 13:36:13 2004 Received: by dont.panix.com (8.11.6p2-a/8.8.8/PanixLC1.7) id i28IaDc20648 for bananafish-outgoing; Mon, 8 Mar 2004 13:36:13 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <200403081553.i28Fr9dL015602@theseus.peterson.af.mil> From: Yocum Daniel R Civ 21 CES/CEOE To: "'bananafish@roughdraft.org'" Subject: RE: Faulkner re JDS Date: Mon, 8 Mar 2004 15:53:06 -0000 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2657.72) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Sender: owner-bananafish@roughdraft.org Precedence: bulk Reply-To: bananafish@roughdraft.org Stream of Conscious lecturing John O., and believe it or not, I agree with you. Reminds me of Latin, waiting for the period. Daniel Man, do you think Bill lectured that way, too? Imagine it, sitting there as the parenthetical interruptions and subordinate clauses roll on... *Absalom, Absalom!* in the front of the classroom... I think it would be hypnotizing. Or horrifying. --John - * Unsubscribing? Mail majordomo@roughdraft.org with the message * UNSUBSCRIBE BANANAFISH From oconnort@panix.com Mon Mar 8 17:01:14 2004 Received: from localhost (localhost [[UNIX: localhost]]) by dont.panix.com (8.11.6p2-a/8.8.8/PanixLC1.7) id i28M1Ed29403 for bananafish-outgoing; Mon, 8 Mar 2004 17:01:14 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <404CC004.8010807@drew.edu> Date: Mon, 08 Mar 2004 13:48:36 -0500 From: James Rovira Organization: Drew University User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.4) Gecko/20030624 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: bananafish@roughdraft.org Subject: Re: Whuppin' on that dead horse somemore References: <200403081612.i28GCZts028734@theseus.peterson.af.mil> In-Reply-To: <200403081612.i28GCZts028734@theseus.peterson.af.mil> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Sender: owner-bananafish@roughdraft.org Precedence: bulk Reply-To: bananafish@roughdraft.org Ha...sounds like an interesting site. It's pretty funny we're discussing this now, because a prof. at my university has come up for tenure review, and the faculty review committee asked me to collect student input then write a narrative describing it (I'm the grad school class president this year -- that's why I was asked to do this). The committee gave me some suggested guidelines making it perfectly clear, of course, that they were only guidelines and I could ask students any questions I wanted. Here they are. I think it's OK to post it here because I've basically converted their guidelines into a public web form that collects data into a text file. You might find this interesting: > 1. We would encourage students to submit their comments /in > writing/ so that the committee has access to exact wording. > Self-identification is optional. > 2. The committee would prefer that the student comments be > /contextualized/. In other words, it would be good to know in > what capacity the student knows the faculty member under review. > What courses have been taken with the faculty member? Is the > faculty member the student’s advisor? Has the faculty member > been a sponsor of an extra-curricular group, event, or activity > in which the student has participated? Has the faculty member > mentored or engaged the student in some other way? > 3. The committee desires particular information regarding the > faculty member’s competence and effectiveness as a teacher in > the following areas: > 1. Classroom performance. Did the faculty member demonstrate > a command of the subject matter? What pedagogical > methods—e.g., lecture, discussion, demonstration—were > employed? Were they effective? Were they appropriate to > the goals of the course(s)? Did the faculty member > stimulate thinking and learning? > 2. Course content and design. Were the objectives of the > course(s) clear? Were they met? Was course content > substantive? Was the overall course experience important > for the student’s educational development? > 3. Assessment of student performance. Did the faculty member > respond clearly, constructively, and in a timely fashion > to student work, (both written assignments and verbal > contributions)? > 4. Ability to create a constructive learning environment. Did > the faculty member encourage a variety of responses to > course content? Could students anticipate that their > questions and opinions would be treated with respect by > both the instructor and their peers? Did the faculty > member address issues of gender, ethnic, cultural, > theological diversity in the subject material? Was the > faculty member sensitive to the questions, concerns, and > perspectives of the students? > Pretty interesting that there are specific questions regarding both cultural and intellectual diversity at the end there. When reviewing faculty for tenure, the committee also takes into account faculty opinion, publications, course evaluations, and has an outside agency also review the person being considered for tenure. When all the info has been collected I think faculty votes for or against tenure, and then the committee makes a recommendation to the board of Trustees for or against tenure. Not all universities are the same, of course, but this is what goes on at mine. Jim - * Unsubscribing? Mail majordomo@roughdraft.org with the message * UNSUBSCRIBE BANANAFISH From oconnort@panix.com Mon Mar 8 17:01:15 2004 Received: by dont.panix.com (8.11.6p2-a/8.8.8/PanixLC1.7) id i28M1Fg29414 for bananafish-outgoing; Mon, 8 Mar 2004 17:01:15 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <20040308211414.26438.qmail@web60908.mail.yahoo.com> Date: Mon, 8 Mar 2004 13:14:14 -0800 (PST) From: City Cabin Subject: Re: Faulkner re JDS To: bananafish@roughdraft.org In-Reply-To: <25.450dd783.2d7a962b@aol.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Sender: owner-bananafish@roughdraft.org Precedence: bulk Reply-To: bananafish@roughdraft.org --- Omlor@aol.com wrote: > William Faulkner writes (or says): > I should have been a bit more clear. Faulkner read an essay, "A Word to Young Writers," to some entity called The English Club at the University of Virginia. It was circa 5 pages of print. One paragraph dealt with Catcher. He then took questions. As an example of his answering questions, here's the first q & a. Q: May I ask you what moved you to write that essay? I find it very profound. A: I reckon that anything you have devoted a great deal of your time to, any sort of craft, whether it's an important one or not, becomes prettty serious to you, and maybe when you get along you think, Well, I have--if it's not valid--I have wasted a lot of pretty valuable time, and so I prefer to believe that it is valid and it should continue, and the people to carry it on are the people that come after me, and if my thoughts about it are worth anyting, whether they are or not, it had better be expressed so the young people after me can take a look at it and say, It's nonsense or not. I suppose that's the reason. That no particular need to improve writing or to better man's condition maybe, any more than any artist has, I think maybe it's not so much to better man's condition but maybe to uplift his heart, to give him pleasure, fun. Andyway, it becomes important to one who's spent all his life laying the brick and he wants the trade to bricklaying to continue. --Bruce __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Search - Find what you’re looking for faster http://search.yahoo.com - * Unsubscribing? Mail majordomo@roughdraft.org with the message * UNSUBSCRIBE BANANAFISH From oconnort@panix.com Mon Mar 8 17:01:15 2004 Received: by dont.panix.com (8.11.6p2-a/8.8.8/PanixLC1.7) id i28M1FN29409 for bananafish-outgoing; Mon, 8 Mar 2004 17:01:15 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <404CC313.3050109@drew.edu> Date: Mon, 08 Mar 2004 14:01:39 -0500 From: James Rovira Organization: Drew University User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.4) Gecko/20030624 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: bananafish@roughdraft.org Subject: Re: In Defense of the Associate Professor References: <404C8CCB.1010509@drew.edu> In-Reply-To: <404C8CCB.1010509@drew.edu> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-bananafish@roughdraft.org Precedence: bulk Reply-To: bananafish@roughdraft.org Bah. That last response was unclear/misleading. Here's what I would say about the two possibilities you mentioned: 1. I think we both agree that Scottie didn't "intend" direct hostility to Will by his comments. 2. But Will's point of view may best be represented by description 2. So by saying description 1 is "accurate" and 2 is "inaccurate," you're invalidating what I think was Will's point of view. I think a lot of this simply has to do with using certain words in a public context, without considering the variety of responses possible from a wide range or listeners. But here I am speaking for him, and it's sounding ridiculous. Jim James Rovira wrote: > Your description of the situation in your previous post excluded > Will's point of view - namely, that any use of the word is pejorative > and personally offensive. In fact, I believe you said that no > personal attack was involved in Scottie's comments, and that Tim was > mistaken by asserting that. While we both agree that description #1 > below is what happened, that's not the specific point you were taking > issue with nor the point to which I was referring. > Jim > >> >> 1- One man left in outrage at another man's use of a word that the first >> takes to warrant physical violence in response, though the man who >> used it >> did so without hostility. >> >> 2- One man left in response to pointless venom and ridicule on behalf >> of the >> other. >> >> It seems to me that the former description, on which we both seem to >> agree, >> is accurate for the particular case invoked (and far from denying them, >> rather vividly suggests the different points of view), while the >> latter is >> inaccurate and unfair. >> >> That's what I mean by "accurate," and that I take #2 to be >> "inaccurate" is >> why I spoke up in this thread. >> >> -Robbie > - * Unsubscribing? Mail majordomo@roughdraft.org with the message * UNSUBSCRIBE BANANAFISH From oconnort@panix.com Mon Mar 8 21:04:41 2004 Received: by dont.panix.com (8.11.6p2-a/8.8.8/PanixLC1.7) id i2924fo08860 for bananafish-outgoing; Mon, 8 Mar 2004 21:04:41 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <200403082228.i28MSMTv008158@theseus.peterson.af.mil> From: Yocum Daniel R Civ 21 CES/CEOE To: "'bananafish@roughdraft.org'" Subject: RE: Whuppin' on that dead horse somemore Date: Mon, 8 Mar 2004 22:28:20 -0000 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2657.72) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by dont.panix.com id i28MTtb00874 Sender: owner-bananafish@roughdraft.org Precedence: bulk Reply-To: bananafish@roughdraft.org Jim, so much for anonymity (#2) and retribution. Yea, document my Prof's feces stained undies. In boot camp, I think it was 5-5 day (fifth week, fifth day, about halfway through) our Company Commanders (CC's) left the room and we were giving appraisals to rate our CC's. They encouraged us to put as much detail down as possible and assured us the we would remain anonymous, no names on the critiques. Many complained in detail. Three days later our CC's ripped us a new one, cycling our butts while quoting the critique comments apparently from memory. They were real comments being quoted since they were confirmed by the Company members later. And they would ride specific individuals the whole time quoting relevant comments. Like the details would not reveal the commentator. I turned in a blank critique thinking, hey this is boot camp not summer camp. I am glad I did since I was not awarded any undue attention. And in my experience profs can be much more petty than my dear old CC's. At least all that cycling made us tough mo-fo's but a bad grade and a bad department reputation can be a hellva' a lot more damaging. Jim, you have to think of something better. If the comments are not "contextualized" are they likely to be disregarded? Daniel > 1. We would encourage students to submit their comments /in > writing/ so that the committee has access to exact wording. > Self-identification is optional. > 2. The committee would prefer that the student comments be > /contextualized/. In other words, it would be good to know in > what capacity the student knows the faculty member under review. > What courses have been taken with the faculty member? Is the > faculty member the student’s advisor? Has the faculty member > been a sponsor of an extra-curricular group, event, or activity > in which the student has participated? Has the faculty member > mentored or engaged the student in some other way? > 3. The committee desires particular information regarding the > faculty member’s competence and effectiveness as a teacher in > the following areas: > 1. Classroom performance. Did the faculty member demonstrate > a command of the subject matter? What pedagogical > methods—e.g., lecture, discussion, demonstration—were > employed? Were they effective? Were they appropriate to > the goals of the course(s)? Did the faculty member > stimulate thinking and learning? > 2. Course content and design. Were the objectives of the > course(s) clear? Were they met? Was course content > substantive? Was the overall course experience important > for the student’s educational development? Jim - * Unsubscribing? Mail majordomo@roughdraft.org with the message * UNSUBSCRIBE BANANAFISH From oconnort@panix.com Mon Mar 8 21:04:41 2004 Received: from localhost (localhost [[UNIX: localhost]]) by dont.panix.com (8.11.6p2-a/8.8.8/PanixLC1.7) id i2924f508849 for bananafish-outgoing; Mon, 8 Mar 2004 21:04:41 -0500 (EST) From: Omlor@aol.com Message-ID: <1e8.1acb53bc.2d7e494e@aol.com> Date: Mon, 8 Mar 2004 17:10:22 EST Subject: Sad news To: bananafish@roughdraft.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="part1_1e8.1acb53bc.2d7e494e_boundary" X-Mailer: 6.0 sub 10581 Sender: owner-bananafish@roughdraft.org Precedence: bulk Reply-To: bananafish@roughdraft.org --part1_1e8.1acb53bc.2d7e494e_boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit For those who have not heard.... The body of Spalding Gray was pulled out of the East River this past weekend. He was 62. --John --part1_1e8.1acb53bc.2d7e494e_boundary Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable For those who have not heard....

The body of Spalding Gray was pulled out of the East River this past wee= kend.  He was 62.

--John --part1_1e8.1acb53bc.2d7e494e_boundary-- - * Unsubscribing? Mail majordomo@roughdraft.org with the message * UNSUBSCRIBE BANANAFISH From oconnort@panix.com Mon Mar 8 21:04:42 2004 Received: by dont.panix.com (8.11.6p2-a/8.8.8/PanixLC1.7) id i2924gB08861 for bananafish-outgoing; Mon, 8 Mar 2004 21:04:42 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <200403082337.i28NbEpb008618@theseus.peterson.af.mil> From: Yocum Daniel R Civ 21 CES/CEOE To: "'bananafish@roughdraft.org'" Subject: News for John Date: Mon, 8 Mar 2004 23:37:13 -0000 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2657.72) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Sender: owner-bananafish@roughdraft.org Precedence: bulk Reply-To: bananafish@roughdraft.org Here you go John. http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,113601,00.html Daniel * Unsubscribing? Mail majordomo@roughdraft.org with the message * UNSUBSCRIBE BANANAFISH - * Unsubscribing? Mail majordomo@roughdraft.org with the message * UNSUBSCRIBE BANANAFISH From oconnort@panix.com Tue Mar 9 14:03:42 2004 Received: from localhost (localhost [[UNIX: localhost]]) by dont.panix.com (8.11.6p2-a/8.8.8/PanixLC1.7) id i29J3gq16044 for bananafish-outgoing; Tue, 9 Mar 2004 14:03:42 -0500 (EST) X400-Received: by mta Salem-MTA1 in /c=US/admd= /prmd=or.gov/; Relayed; 09 Mar 2004 08:15:38 -0800 X400-Received: by /c=US/admd= /prmd=or.gov/; Relayed; 09 Mar 2004 08:15:38 -0800 X400-MTS-Identifier: [/c=US/admd= /prmd=or.gov/; 404DEDA3.ADC2.B184.000] Content-Identifier: 062AA404DEDAA004 Content-Return: Allowed X400-Content-Type: P2-1988 ( 22 ) Conversion: Allowed Original-Encoded-Information-Types: IA5-Text Disclose-Recipients: Prohibited Alternate-Recipient: Allowed X400-Originator: Michael.J.Anello@state.or.us X400-Recipients: non-disclosure; Message-Id: <404DEDA3.ADC2.B184.000*/c=us/admd=/prmd=or.gov/o=HR/ou=gwise/s=Anello/g=Michael/i=J/@MHS> Date: 09 Mar 2004 08:15:38 -0800 From: ANELLO Michael J To: bananafish@roughdraft.org, Omlor@aol.com Subject: Re: Sad news Sender: owner-bananafish@roughdraft.org Precedence: bulk Reply-To: bananafish@roughdraft.org I haven't been this sad since ol' blue eyes past on..... ...well....ol' no eyes now.....but, you know what i mean. he's got the world on a string. but hey, people gotta die, otherwise we'd end up using them for fuel or food. and even though gay marriages are the new portland order, i highly doubt we're ready for people to be either food or fuel. john kerry might be able to sell it.....but bush would be all over it in a second! he believes people are to be killed in war or hungry on the streets....but they will NOT be used for fuel or eaten as food. damn no! hell damn no! clones yes. people no. i'm not gay or anything (not that there's anything wrong with that) but i don't think i'd be all that against having gay sex with my clone. what's the big deal? i've been told a dillion too many times to go eff myself. i'd learn them! i'd learn'em all! >>> Omlor@aol.com 03/08/04 06:05PM >>> For those who have not heard.... The body of Spalding Gray was pulled out of the East River this past weekend. He was 62. --John - * Unsubscribing? Mail majordomo@roughdraft.org with the message * UNSUBSCRIBE BANANAFISH From oconnort@panix.com Tue Mar 9 14:03:43 2004 Received: by dont.panix.com (8.11.6p2-a/8.8.8/PanixLC1.7) id i29J3hT16051 for bananafish-outgoing; Tue, 9 Mar 2004 14:03:43 -0500 (EST) X-Originating-IP: [134.50.112.1] X-Originating-Email: [ralanya@hotmail.com] X-Sender: ralanya@hotmail.com From: "Robin Dudley" To: bananafish@roughdraft.org Subject: Re: In Defense of Ceasing Date: Tue, 09 Mar 2004 16:00:23 +0000 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed Message-ID: X-OriginalArrivalTime: 09 Mar 2004 16:00:26.0650 (UTC) FILETIME=[A331F7A0:01C405EF] Sender: owner-bananafish@roughdraft.org Precedence: bulk Reply-To: bananafish@roughdraft.org Hey All You Drama Addicts, This discussion of Will and dragging of the past out into the light has nothing to do with Salinger. What would Holden do? What would Seymour say? What would Boo Boo tell her son who was upset because somoeone said Daddy was a kite? I haven't been following--partly because i try not to indulge my weakness for personal intrigue and gossip--I have enough alcoholic/drug addicted friends to slaveringly tut-tut over here in Idaho anyway. But you know, my favorite part of Catcher is when Holden tells Sally "You give me a royal pain in the ass." She's all, "No boy has ever said that to me before!" and he knows he shouldn't have done it, but he laughs. That cracks my shit up. A big, asshole, horse-laugh. People say mean shit. People get offended and leave. Whether the offensive term was used in order to goad the AP into leaving BF is the issue, I think. Did he say it on purpose? Nobody deserves to be baited--and people who bite the bait aren't all that fun--they're sort of the Sallies of this world. r. >From: James Rovira >Reply-To: bananafish@roughdraft.org >To: bananafish@roughdraft.org >Subject: Re: In Defense of the Associate Professor >Date: Mon, 08 Mar 2004 14:01:39 -0500 > >Bah. That last response was unclear/misleading. Here's what I would say >about the two possibilities you mentioned: > >1. I think we both agree that Scottie didn't "intend" direct hostility to >Will by his comments. >2. But Will's point of view may best be represented by description 2. > >So by saying description 1 is "accurate" and 2 is "inaccurate," you're >invalidating what I think was Will's point of view. I think a lot of this >simply has to do with using certain words in a public context, without >considering the variety of responses possible from a wide range or >listeners. > >But here I am speaking for him, and it's sounding ridiculous. > >Jim > >James Rovira wrote: > >>Your description of the situation in your previous post excluded Will's >>point of view - namely, that any use of the word is pejorative and >>personally offensive. In fact, I believe you said that no personal attack >>was involved in Scottie's comments, and that Tim was mistaken by asserting >>that. While we both agree that description #1 below is what happened, >>that's not the specific point you were taking issue with nor the point to >>which I was referring. >>Jim >> >>> >>>1- One man left in outrage at another man's use of a word that the first >>>takes to warrant physical violence in response, though the man who used >>>it >>>did so without hostility. >>> >>>2- One man left in response to pointless venom and ridicule on behalf of >>>the >>>other. >>> >>>It seems to me that the former description, on which we both seem to >>>agree, >>>is accurate for the particular case invoked (and far from denying them, >>>rather vividly suggests the different points of view), while the latter >>>is >>>inaccurate and unfair. >>> >>>That's what I mean by "accurate," and that I take #2 to be "inaccurate" >>>is >>>why I spoke up in this thread. >>> >>>-Robbie >> > >- >* Unsubscribing? Mail majordomo@roughdraft.org with the message >* UNSUBSCRIBE BANANAFISH _________________________________________________________________ Get business advice and resources to improve your work life, from bCentral. http://special.msn.com/bcentral/loudclear.armx - * Unsubscribing? Mail majordomo@roughdraft.org with the message * UNSUBSCRIBE BANANAFISH From oconnort@panix.com Tue Mar 9 14:03:42 2004 Received: by dont.panix.com (8.11.6p2-a/8.8.8/PanixLC1.7) id i29J3gR16045 for bananafish-outgoing; Tue, 9 Mar 2004 14:03:42 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <404DD438.7070101@drew.edu> Date: Tue, 09 Mar 2004 09:27:04 -0500 From: James Rovira Organization: Drew University User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.5) Gecko/20031007 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: bananafish@roughdraft.org Subject: Re: Whuppin' on that dead horse somemore References: <200403082228.i28MSMTv008158@theseus.peterson.af.mil> In-Reply-To: <200403082228.i28MSMTv008158@theseus.peterson.af.mil> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-bananafish@roughdraft.org Precedence: bulk Reply-To: bananafish@roughdraft.org Heh...paranoia isn't becoming, Daniel. At any rate, since filling out the form is a voluntary activity, and since a prof will have taught around 200-300 students during the 3-4 years or so before he/she comes up for tenure review (and yes, since it's a web form that will be distributed to all currently matriculated grad students, many of those will be able to fill out the survey), it would be much more difficult to attribute a specific comment to a specific student than it was in your situation (smaller group of people and the CCs knew every single person who submitted comments). But you're forgetting the other side too. Some students WANT the prof to get tenure and don't even want anonymity. They're more than willing to speak up and be identified. In this particular case, I know of three students personally who fit this category. Individual negative comments probably wouldn't mean too much, but a pattern of negative comments would. In either case, trying to identify a particular student would be moot. In the first case, so what, and in the second, the professor would probably be identified as the problem, not the student. Really pretty interesting that you refuse to give any credit at all, even when you're given concrete reasons to admit to at least one example of the process working with respect for student opinion. This reveals deep seated prejudice more than anything else. It may be a prejudice justified by your past experiences, but it's still a prejudice. Jim Yocum Daniel R Civ 21 CES/CEOE wrote: >Jim, so much for anonymity (#2) and retribution. Yea, document my Prof's >feces stained undies. > >In boot camp, I think it was 5-5 day (fifth week, fifth day, about halfway >through) our Company Commanders (CC's) left the room and we were giving >appraisals to rate our CC's. They encouraged us to put as much detail down >as possible and assured us the we would remain anonymous, no names on the >critiques. Many complained in detail. Three days later our CC's ripped us >a new one, cycling our butts while quoting the critique comments apparently >from memory. They were real comments being quoted since they were confirmed >by the Company members later. And they would ride specific individuals the >whole time quoting relevant comments. Like the details would not reveal the >commentator. I turned in a blank critique thinking, hey this is boot camp >not summer camp. I am glad I did since I was not awarded any undue >attention. And in my experience profs can be much more petty than my dear >old CC's. At least all that cycling made us tough mo-fo's but a bad grade >and a bad department reputation can be a hellva' a lot more damaging. Jim, >you have to think of something better. If the comments are not >"contextualized" are they likely to be disregarded? >Daniel > > > > > > - * Unsubscribing? Mail majordomo@roughdraft.org with the message * UNSUBSCRIBE BANANAFISH From oconnort@panix.com Tue Mar 9 18:56:35 2004 Received: from localhost (localhost [[UNIX: localhost]]) by dont.panix.com (8.11.6p2-a/8.8.8/PanixLC1.7) id i29NuZT28026 for bananafish-outgoing; Tue, 9 Mar 2004 18:56:35 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <000d01c4060c$cc06fa00$43a57dc2@j8l6n9> From: "Scottie Bowman" To: References: Subject: Re: In Defense of Ceasing Date: Tue, 9 Mar 2004 19:28:23 -0000 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Sender: owner-bananafish@roughdraft.org Precedence: bulk Reply-To: bananafish@roughdraft.org I hate to bring this flattering autopsy to an end with a statement of authorial intent but if anyone cares to look up the archives for December 23 2002, they can hardly fail to recognise that I was making a mock indignant plea for the retention of the phrase Happy Christmas - in preference to what I regarded, & still regard, as the mealy-mouthed alternatives. It had nothing to do with the AP - whom it hadn't actually occurred to me to think of as Jewish. All the Jews I'd known & loved up till then had a sense of humour that was inimitable & greatly cherished. Scottie B. - * Unsubscribing? Mail majordomo@roughdraft.org with the message * UNSUBSCRIBE BANANAFISH From oconnort@panix.com Tue Mar 9 18:56:36 2004 Received: by dont.panix.com (8.11.6p2-a/8.8.8/PanixLC1.7) id i29NuaH28042 for bananafish-outgoing; Tue, 9 Mar 2004 18:56:36 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <200403092101.i29L1MBw001080@theseus.peterson.af.mil> From: Yocum Daniel R Civ 21 CES/CEOE To: "'bananafish@roughdraft.org'" Subject: RE: Whuppin' on that dead horse somemore Date: Tue, 9 Mar 2004 21:01:20 -0000 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2657.72) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Sender: owner-bananafish@roughdraft.org Precedence: bulk Reply-To: bananafish@roughdraft.org Jimmy Legs, good luck with that. Or rather, good luck to the students. I am surprised that at your age you can use words like "all". But best of all, you used "all" in the same sentence with "prejudice". Dang, John O. the Hare Better glance back, the tortoise is coming on strong. Daniel Heh...paranoia isn't becoming, Daniel. At any rate, since filling out the form is a voluntary activity, and since a prof will have taught around 200-300 students during the 3-4 years or so before he/she comes up for tenure review (and yes, since it's a web form that will be distributed to all currently matriculated grad students, many of those will be able to fill out the survey), it would be much more difficult to attribute a specific comment to a specific student than it was in your situation (smaller group of people and the CCs knew every single person who submitted comments). But you're forgetting the other side too. Some students WANT the prof to get tenure and don't even want anonymity. They're more than willing to speak up and be identified. In this particular case, I know of three students personally who fit this category. Individual negative comments probably wouldn't mean too much, but a pattern of negative comments would. In either case, trying to identify a particular student would be moot. In the first case, so what, and in the second, the professor would probably be identified as the problem, not the student. Really pretty interesting that you refuse to give any credit at all, even when you're given concrete reasons to admit to at least one example of the process working with respect for student opinion. This reveals deep seated prejudice more than anything else. It may be a prejudice justified by your past experiences, but it's still a prejudice. Jim - * Unsubscribing? Mail majordomo@roughdraft.org with the message * UNSUBSCRIBE BANANAFISH From oconnort@panix.com Tue Mar 9 18:56:36 2004 Received: by dont.panix.com (8.11.6p2-a/8.8.8/PanixLC1.7) id i29NuaX28043 for bananafish-outgoing; Tue, 9 Mar 2004 18:56:36 -0500 (EST) X-Originating-IP: [63.201.230.16] X-Originating-Email: [lmanningvines@hotmail.com] X-Sender: lmanningvines@hotmail.com From: "L. Manning Vines" To: Subject: Re: In Defense of the Associate Professor Date: Tue, 9 Mar 2004 18:49:58 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1158 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1165 Message-ID: X-OriginalArrivalTime: 09 Mar 2004 23:50:17.0473 (UTC) FILETIME=[463C2F10:01C40631] Sender: owner-bananafish@roughdraft.org Precedence: bulk Reply-To: bananafish@roughdraft.org Jim writes: << Your description of the situation in your previous post excluded Will's point of view - namely, that any use of the word is pejorative and personally offensive. >> And in another message: << So by saying description 1 is "accurate" and 2 is "inaccurate," you're invalidating what I think was Will's point of view. >> I think we're several message into absurdity, here, and you sound no more interested in continuing that I am. We ought to wrap this up, I think. I don't think I ever excluded Will's point of view. He left in outrage at a word that outrages him. I think it's quite clear that the word used was unacceptable to him, and I made explicit that I am passing no judgment on that fact. If Will's point of view included the belief that Scottie was ridiculing him or aiming "pointless venom" at him, in this respect Will's point of view was wrong. I have not speculated on whether Will's point of view included this belief. It is clear that Will's point of view did include the belief that Scottie used an unacceptable word, and the only point of contention then would be whether the word is acceptable. This, of course, is a matter of opinion, and I have repeatedly made clear that I am not interested in that discussion, and have passed no judgment on the matter. I don't care to argue just now about a dogma requiring quotation marks around the word "accurate," or requiring the elimination of it from one's working vocabulary. Feel free to imagine the quotation marks around all of my uses of the word, or to imagine it replaced with a more acceptable formulation. All I mean to say in this thread is that I think the events prior to Will's leaving the list have been exaggerated and Scottie maligned. Perfectly ordinary, Robbie - * Unsubscribing? Mail majordomo@roughdraft.org with the message * UNSUBSCRIBE BANANAFISH From oconnort@panix.com Tue Mar 9 18:56:36 2004 Received: by dont.panix.com (8.11.6p2-a/8.8.8/PanixLC1.7) id i29Nua028037 for bananafish-outgoing; Tue, 9 Mar 2004 18:56:36 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <200403092017.i29KHnTW007796@theseus.peterson.af.mil> From: Yocum Daniel R Civ 21 CES/CEOE To: "'bananafish@roughdraft.org'" Subject: RE: Sad news Date: Tue, 9 Mar 2004 20:17:48 -0000 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2657.72) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Sender: owner-bananafish@roughdraft.org Precedence: bulk Reply-To: bananafish@roughdraft.org John said he was 62, I've never been 62 but I was natural number e once, it was cool but way too hard to type out. Mike, I'd say you are the square root of negative one, you know, way off on your own plane of coordinates. The good news is, we have ways of making you real. Daniel I haven't been this sad since ol' blue eyes past on..... ...well....ol' no eyes now.....but, you know what i mean. he's got the world on a string. but hey, people gotta die, otherwise we'd end up using them for fuel or food. and even though gay marriages are the new portland order, i highly doubt we're ready for people to be either food or fuel. john kerry might be able to sell it.....but bush would be all over it in a second! he believes people are to be killed in war or hungry on the streets....but they will NOT be used for fuel or eaten as food. damn no! hell damn no! clones yes. people no. i'm not gay or anything (not that there's anything wrong with that) but i don't think i'd be all that against having gay sex with my clone. what's the big deal? i've been told a dillion too many times to go eff myself. i'd learn them! i'd learn'em all! Mike He was 62. --John - * Unsubscribing? Mail majordomo@roughdraft.org with the message * UNSUBSCRIBE BANANAFISH - * Unsubscribing? Mail majordomo@roughdraft.org with the message * UNSUBSCRIBE BANANAFISH From oconnort@panix.com Tue Mar 9 20:20:43 2004 Received: by dont.panix.com (8.11.6p2-a/8.8.8/PanixLC1.7) id i2A1KhJ00997 for bananafish-outgoing; Tue, 9 Mar 2004 20:20:43 -0500 (EST) From: Omlor@aol.com Message-ID: <6d.23f019a4.2d7fc0ac@aol.com> Date: Tue, 9 Mar 2004 19:51:56 EST Subject: Re: Whuppin' on that dead horse somemore To: bananafish@roughdraft.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="part1_6d.23f019a4.2d7fc0ac_boundary" X-Mailer: 6.0 sub 10581 Sender: owner-bananafish@roughdraft.org Precedence: bulk Reply-To: bananafish@roughdraft.org --part1_6d.23f019a4.2d7fc0ac_boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Daniel, I, for one, love student evaluations. They're the best thing in my vita. And so I repeat, in the words of our heroic emperor, "Bring 'em on." --John PS: Regarding the other thread, I'm not sure what you and Mike are talking about or what it has to do with Spalding Gray, but thanks for sharing your thoughts. --part1_6d.23f019a4.2d7fc0ac_boundary Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Daniel,

I, for one, love student evaluations.  They're the best thing in my= vita.  And so I repeat, in the words of our heroic emperor, "Bring 'em= on."

--John

PS: Regarding the other thread, I'm not sure what you and Mike are talki= ng about or what it has to do with Spalding Gray, but thanks for sharing you= r thoughts. --part1_6d.23f019a4.2d7fc0ac_boundary-- - * Unsubscribing? Mail majordomo@roughdraft.org with the message * UNSUBSCRIBE BANANAFISH From oconnort@panix.com Tue Mar 9 20:20:42 2004 Received: from localhost (localhost [[UNIX: localhost]]) by dont.panix.com (8.11.6p2-a/8.8.8/PanixLC1.7) id i2A1Kg200992 for bananafish-outgoing; Tue, 9 Mar 2004 20:20:42 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <404E650A.5030300@drew.edu> Date: Tue, 09 Mar 2004 19:44:58 -0500 From: James Rovira User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.4) Gecko/20030624 Netscape/7.1 (ax) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: bananafish@roughdraft.org Subject: Re: Whuppin' on that dead horse somemore References: <200403092101.i29L1MBw001080@theseus.peterson.af.mil> In-Reply-To: <200403092101.i29L1MBw001080@theseus.peterson.af.mil> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-bananafish@roughdraft.org Precedence: bulk Reply-To: bananafish@roughdraft.org I'm not quite sure I understand your response. "All" was being used in a diminutive sense -- "not giving any credit 'at all'" -- not in an "all-encompassing" sense. Jim Yocum Daniel R Civ 21 CES/CEOE wrote: >Jimmy Legs, good luck with that. Or rather, good luck to the students. I >am surprised that at your age you can use words like "all". But best of >all, you used "all" in the same sentence with "prejudice". Dang, John O. >the Hare Better glance back, the tortoise is coming on strong. >Daniel > > > >Heh...paranoia isn't becoming, Daniel. > >At any rate, since filling out the form is a voluntary activity, and >since a prof will have taught around 200-300 students during the 3-4 >years or so before he/she comes up for tenure review (and yes, since >it's a web form that will be distributed to all currently matriculated >grad students, many of those will be able to fill out the survey), it >would be much more difficult to attribute a specific comment to a >specific student than it was in your situation (smaller group of people >and the CCs knew every single person who submitted comments). > >But you're forgetting the other side too. Some students WANT the prof >to get tenure and don't even want anonymity. They're more than willing >to speak up and be identified. In this particular case, I know of three >students personally who fit this category. > >Individual negative comments probably wouldn't mean too much, but a >pattern of negative comments would. In either case, trying to identify a >particular student would be moot. In the first case, so what, and in >the second, the professor would probably be identified as the problem, >not the student. > >Really pretty interesting that you refuse to give any credit at all, >even when you're given concrete reasons to admit to at least one example >of the process working with respect for student opinion. This reveals >deep seated prejudice more than anything else. It may be a prejudice >justified by your past experiences, but it's still a prejudice. > >Jim > > > - * Unsubscribing? Mail majordomo@roughdraft.org with the message * UNSUBSCRIBE BANANAFISH From oconnort@panix.com Tue Mar 9 20:20:43 2004 Received: by dont.panix.com (8.11.6p2-a/8.8.8/PanixLC1.7) id i2A1KhF01002 for bananafish-outgoing; Tue, 9 Mar 2004 20:20:43 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <404E682E.8080909@drew.edu> Date: Tue, 09 Mar 2004 19:58:22 -0500 From: James Rovira User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.4) Gecko/20030624 Netscape/7.1 (ax) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: bananafish@roughdraft.org Subject: Re: In Defense of the Associate Professor References: In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-bananafish@roughdraft.org Precedence: bulk Reply-To: bananafish@roughdraft.org Right...that's how I was describing Will's point of view, and you've confirmed my description of your attitude toward it. So our real difference is in our perceptions of Will's point of view. I didn't see him as merely taking offense at the use of the word, but as taking offense because he understood the word as a personal insult. I only use quotation marks around the word "accurate" -in this particular case- (lest you're tempted to magnify my comments to encompass the entire cosmos and all absolute truth) because I don't think there is -one-, "accurate," description of the events -in this particular case-, as is the case in many (not all, but many) real life human interactions. There are multiple descriptions from multiple points of view. I would use the word "accurate" without quotation marks when describing mathematical sums and -some- real life human interactions. Thanks much, Scottie, for reminding us of your post and clarifying its intent :). Jim L. Manning Vines wrote: >If Will's point of view included the belief that Scottie was >ridiculing him or aiming "pointless venom" at him, in this respect Will's >point of view was wrong. > >Robbie > > > - * Unsubscribing? Mail majordomo@roughdraft.org with the message * UNSUBSCRIBE BANANAFISH From oconnort@panix.com Tue Mar 9 23:04:10 2004 Received: from localhost (localhost [[UNIX: localhost]]) by dont.panix.com (8.11.6p2-a/8.8.8/PanixLC1.7) id i2A44AG06843 for bananafish-outgoing; Tue, 9 Mar 2004 23:04:10 -0500 (EST) Date: Tue, 09 Mar 2004 22:27:37 -0500 (EST) From: Michael Allen Nowek Subject: Re: Heroic Nun Taught Catcher To: bananafish@roughdraft.org Message-id: <4744329.1078889257979.JavaMail.nowekm1@southernct.edu> MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Sender: owner-bananafish@roughdraft.org Precedence: bulk Reply-To: bananafish@roughdraft.org I think that's pretty damn cool. Is that all there is about the nun in that letter? I would love to know why she felt so strongly about teaching Catcher, being a woman of the cloth and all. I'm sure she has some pretty interesting reasons. -Mike N City Cabin wrote: >From a November 11, 1961 Flannery O'Connor letter: > >"When I was in Minnesota last year one of the Sisters >there told me that she had taught The Catcher in the >Rye in her high school and parents had complained and >the Bishop had told her to quit and she defended her >position and was consequently sent to some outpost in >the Dakotas. Anyway here she was here and in good >odor." > > >--Bruce > >P.S. I haven't forgotten the F&Z review which >O'Connor endorsed. Have it on order from Interlibrary Loan. > >__________________________________ >Do you Yahoo!? >Yahoo! Search - Find what you?re looking for faster >http://search.yahoo.com >- >* Unsubscribing? Mail majordomo@roughdraft.org with the message >* UNSUBSCRIBE BANANAFISH > - * Unsubscribing? Mail majordomo@roughdraft.org with the message * UNSUBSCRIBE BANANAFISH From oconnort@panix.com Wed Mar 10 00:24:48 2004 Received: from localhost (localhost [[UNIX: localhost]]) by dont.panix.com (8.11.6p2-a/8.8.8/PanixLC1.7) id i2A5Omi11114 for bananafish-outgoing; Wed, 10 Mar 2004 00:24:48 -0500 (EST) From: "Tim O'Connor" To: bananafish Subject: Re: Heroic Nun Taught Catcher Date: Wed, 10 Mar 2004 00:04:46 -0500 Message-Id: <20040310050446.14313@mail.panix.com> In-Reply-To: <4744329.1078889257979.JavaMail.nowekm1@southernct.edu> References: <4744329.1078889257979.JavaMail.nowekm1@southernct.edu> X-Mailer: CTM PowerMail 4.2.1 us Carbon MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-bananafish@roughdraft.org Precedence: bulk Reply-To: bananafish@roughdraft.org On Tue, Mar 9, 2004, nowekm1@southernct.edu said: >I think that's pretty damn cool. Is that all there is about the nun in >that letter? I would love to know why she felt so strongly about >teaching Catcher, being a woman of the cloth and all. I'm sure she has >some pretty interesting reasons. Maybe she saw herself in the coffee-shop incident where Holden gets all depressed at how little the nuns were eating for breakfast.... --tim - * Unsubscribing? Mail majordomo@roughdraft.org with the message * UNSUBSCRIBE BANANAFISH From oconnort@panix.com Wed Mar 10 19:24:43 2004 Received: by dont.panix.com (8.11.6p2-a/8.8.8/PanixLC1.7) id i2B0OhF25568 for bananafish-outgoing; Wed, 10 Mar 2004 19:24:43 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <200403101946.i2AJktVW015824@theseus.peterson.af.mil> From: Yocum Daniel R Civ 21 CES/CEOE To: "'bananafish@roughdraft.org'" Subject: FW: Sad news Date: Wed, 10 Mar 2004 19:46:54 -0000 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2657.72) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Sender: owner-bananafish@roughdraft.org Precedence: bulk Reply-To: bananafish@roughdraft.org Mike, you're exactly right, the square root of negative one is i. Daniel just sayin, this is not sad news. even if he's nowhere, he's in a better place than here. would god switch the lights on and say game over if every human candle was snuffed out at once? i don't think so. he'd just hit the reset button and here we go again! it's like trying to tell a kid that their goldfish dying, the goldfish they often forgot to feed, the one with the fish tank that was almost never cleaned, the one they didn't care about until it was gone, is a sad thing. it isn't. it's in an infinitely better spot and i'm glad it's gone from here. happy that the life and death wheel rolls. yes, we say that people here on earth can feel sad that someone's gone up to heaven because we will miss them. get back to me in a year and see if this goldfish is missed. on to bigger and better! the past doesn't exist unless you bring it up! screw the meek, alzheimer's patients will be the one's to inherit the earth! i gotta get outta here. gettin' too smurfy. square root of negative one. since i don't know what that is, i shall take it as the highest complement. the only excuse i can offer is that i am deathly (giggle) ill with some sort of awful head cold and dying now would be some sort of relief but i don't know what, since i've never been dead before. coffee. yes, coffe. e. - * Unsubscribing? Mail majordomo@roughdraft.org with the message * UNSUBSCRIBE BANANAFISH - * Unsubscribing? Mail majordomo@roughdraft.org with the message * UNSUBSCRIBE BANANAFISH - * Unsubscribing? Mail majordomo@roughdraft.org with the message * UNSUBSCRIBE BANANAFISH From oconnort@panix.com Wed Mar 10 19:24:42 2004 Received: from localhost (localhost [[UNIX: localhost]]) by dont.panix.com (8.11.6p2-a/8.8.8/PanixLC1.7) id i2B0OgN25563 for bananafish-outgoing; Wed, 10 Mar 2004 19:24:42 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <200403101511.i2AFBTOZ003113@theseus.peterson.af.mil> From: Yocum Daniel R Civ 21 CES/CEOE To: "'bananafish@roughdraft.org'" Subject: RE: Whuppin' on that dead horse and the post he rode in on Date: Wed, 10 Mar 2004 15:11:27 -0000 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2657.72) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Sender: owner-bananafish@roughdraft.org Precedence: bulk Reply-To: bananafish@roughdraft.org John, consider it "brought'en". Concerning 'the other thread", it is mathematical and absurd all at once so don't worry if you don't get it. It is most likely way out of your sphere of experience. Hey thanks for the thanks, it's nice that you acknowledge our thoughts (I wonder, is that good or bad?). Daniel Daniel, I, for one, love student evaluations. They're the best thing in my vita. And so I repeat, in the words of our heroic emperor, "Bring 'em on." --John PS: Regarding the other thread, I'm not sure what you and Mike are talking about or what it has to do with Spalding Gray, but thanks for sharing your thoughts. - * Unsubscribing? Mail majordomo@roughdraft.org with the message * UNSUBSCRIBE BANANAFISH From oconnort@panix.com Wed Mar 10 19:24:42 2004 Received: from localhost (localhost [[UNIX: localhost]]) by dont.panix.com (8.11.6p2-a/8.8.8/PanixLC1.7) id i2B0Og125555 for bananafish-outgoing; Wed, 10 Mar 2004 19:24:42 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <008801c40676$1d654460$02a57dc2@j8l6n9> From: "Scottie Bowman" To: References: <6d.23f019a4.2d7fc0ac@aol.com> Subject: bouncing ball Date: Wed, 10 Mar 2004 08:02:05 -0000 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Sender: owner-bananafish@roughdraft.org Precedence: bulk Reply-To: bananafish@roughdraft.org '... I, for one, love student evaluations. They're the best thing in my vita ...' I can well imagine, John. You certainly get straight As from me. Scottie B. - * Unsubscribing? Mail majordomo@roughdraft.org with the message * UNSUBSCRIBE BANANAFISH From oconnort@panix.com Wed Mar 10 19:24:41 2004 Received: from localhost (localhost [[UNIX: localhost]]) by dont.panix.com (8.11.6p2-a/8.8.8/PanixLC1.7) id i2B0OfX25554 for bananafish-outgoing; Wed, 10 Mar 2004 19:24:41 -0500 (EST) X400-Received: by mta Salem-MTA1 in /c=US/admd= /prmd=or.gov/; Relayed; 10 Mar 2004 08:21:18 -0800 X400-Received: by /c=US/admd= /prmd=or.gov/; Relayed; 10 Mar 2004 08:21:18 -0800 X400-MTS-Identifier: [/c=US/admd= /prmd=or.gov/; 404F407B.ADC2.360B.000] Content-Identifier: 01E6C404F407E014 Content-Return: Allowed X400-Content-Type: P2-1988 ( 22 ) Conversion: Allowed Original-Encoded-Information-Types: IA5-Text Disclose-Recipients: Prohibited Alternate-Recipient: Allowed X400-Originator: Michael.J.Anello@state.or.us X400-Recipients: non-disclosure; Message-Id: <404F407B.ADC2.360B.000*/c=us/admd=/prmd=or.gov/o=HR/ou=gwise/s=Anello/g=Michael/i=J/@MHS> Date: 10 Mar 2004 08:21:18 -0800 From: ANELLO Michael J To: bananafish@roughdraft.org, daniel.yocum@Peterson.af.mil Subject: RE: Sad news Sender: owner-bananafish@roughdraft.org Precedence: bulk Reply-To: bananafish@roughdraft.org just sayin, this is not sad news. even if he's nowhere, he's in a better place than here. would god switch the lights on and say game over if every human candle was snuffed out at once? i don't think so. he'd just hit the reset button and here we go again! it's like trying to tell a kid that their goldfish dying, the goldfish they often forgot to feed, the one with the fish tank that was almost never cleaned, the one they didn't care about until it was gone, is a sad thing. it isn't. it's in an infinitely better spot and i'm glad it's gone from here. happy that the life and death wheel rolls. yes, we say that people here on earth can feel sad that someone's gone up to heaven because we will miss them. get back to me in a year and see if this goldfish is missed. on to bigger and better! the past doesn't exist unless you bring it up! screw the meek, alzheimer's patients will be the one's to inherit the earth! i gotta get outta here. gettin' too smurfy. square root of negative one. since i don't know what that is, i shall take it as the highest complement. the only excuse i can offer is that i am deathly (giggle) ill with some sort of awful head cold and dying now would be some sort of relief but i don't know what, since i've never been dead before. coffee. yes, coffe. e. >>> daniel.yocum@Peterson.af.mil 03/09/04 03:57PM >>> John said he was 62, I've never been 62 but I was natural number e once, it was cool but way too hard to type out. Mike, I'd say you are the square root of negative one, you know, way off on your own plane of coordinates. The good news is, we have ways of making you real. Daniel I haven't been this sad since ol' blue eyes past on..... ...well....ol' no eyes now.....but, you know what i mean. he's got the world on a string. but hey, people gotta die, otherwise we'd end up using them for fuel or food. and even though gay marriages are the new portland order, i highly doubt we're ready for people to be either food or fuel. john kerry might be able to sell it.....but bush would be all over it in a second! he believes people are to be killed in war or hungry on the streets....but they will NOT be used for fuel or eaten as food. damn no! hell damn no! clones yes. people no. i'm not gay or anything (not that there's anything wrong with that) but i don't think i'd be all that against having gay sex with my clone. what's the big deal? i've been told a dillion too many times to go eff myself. i'd learn them! i'd learn'em all! Mike He was 62. --John - * Unsubscribing? Mail majordomo@roughdraft.org with the message * UNSUBSCRIBE BANANAFISH - * Unsubscribing? Mail majordomo@roughdraft.org with the message * UNSUBSCRIBE BANANAFISH - * Unsubscribing? Mail majordomo@roughdraft.org with the message * UNSUBSCRIBE BANANAFISH From oconnort@panix.com Thu Mar 11 09:49:39 2004 Received: from localhost (localhost [[UNIX: localhost]]) by dont.panix.com (8.11.6p2-a/8.8.8/PanixLC1.7) id i2BEndu27540 for bananafish-outgoing; Thu, 11 Mar 2004 09:49:39 -0500 (EST) From: Omlor@aol.com Message-ID: <3d.3bbc7155.2d813def@aol.com> Date: Wed, 10 Mar 2004 22:58:39 EST Subject: Re: Sad news To: bananafish@roughdraft.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="part1_3d.3bbc7155.2d813def_boundary" X-Mailer: 6.0 sub 10581 Sender: owner-bananafish@roughdraft.org Precedence: bulk Reply-To: bananafish@roughdraft.org --part1_3d.3bbc7155.2d813def_boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Michael, "...even if he's nowhere, he's in a better place than here..." Really? I like here. --John=A0 --part1_3d.3bbc7155.2d813def_boundary Content-Type: text/html; charset="ISO-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Michael,

"...even if he's nowhere, he's in a better place than here..."

Really?

I like here.

--John=A0 --part1_3d.3bbc7155.2d813def_boundary-- - * Unsubscribing? Mail majordomo@roughdraft.org with the message * UNSUBSCRIBE BANANAFISH From oconnort@panix.com Thu Mar 11 12:11:25 2004 Received: from localhost (localhost [[UNIX: localhost]]) by dont.panix.com (8.11.6p2-a/8.8.8/PanixLC1.7) id i2BHBPS03642 for bananafish-outgoing; Thu, 11 Mar 2004 12:11:25 -0500 (EST) X400-Received: by mta Salem-MTA1 in /c=US/admd= /prmd=or.gov/; Relayed; 11 Mar 2004 09:08:44 -0800 X400-Received: by /c=US/admd= /prmd=or.gov/; Relayed; 11 Mar 2004 09:08:44 -0800 X400-MTS-Identifier: [/c=US/admd= /prmd=or.gov/; 40509C13.ADC2.0252.000] Content-Identifier: 0513940509D1C068 Content-Return: Allowed X400-Content-Type: P2-1988 ( 22 ) Conversion: Allowed Original-Encoded-Information-Types: IA5-Text Disclose-Recipients: Prohibited Alternate-Recipient: Allowed X400-Originator: Michael.J.Anello@state.or.us X400-Recipients: non-disclosure; Message-Id: <40509C13.ADC2.0252.000*/c=us/admd=/prmd=or.gov/o=HR/ou=gwise/s=Anello/g=Michael/i=J/@MHS> Date: 11 Mar 2004 09:08:44 -0800 From: ANELLO Michael J To: bananafish@roughdraft.org, Omlor@aol.com Subject: Re: Sad news Sender: owner-bananafish@roughdraft.org Precedence: bulk Reply-To: bananafish@roughdraft.org yeah. i like it here too. but there's a better place that we will like better. it's called nowhere. nowhere you've ever been. but i know. because i've been dead before. three years ago. it was neat. but i don't like to talk about it too much. spoil the surprise. all the best, --mike ;) >>> Omlor@aol.com 03/11/04 06:50AM >>> Michael, "...even if he's nowhere, he's in a better place than here..." Really? I like here. --John - * Unsubscribing? Mail majordomo@roughdraft.org with the message * UNSUBSCRIBE BANANAFISH From oconnort@panix.com Thu Mar 11 12:11:26 2004 Received: by dont.panix.com (8.11.6p2-a/8.8.8/PanixLC1.7) id i2BHBQA03647 for bananafish-outgoing; Thu, 11 Mar 2004 12:11:26 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <40507D2B.2050701@drew.edu> Date: Thu, 11 Mar 2004 09:52:27 -0500 From: James Rovira User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.3) Gecko/20030312 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: bananafish@roughdraft.org Subject: Re: Sad news References: <3d.3bbc7155.2d813def@aol.com> In-Reply-To: <3d.3bbc7155.2d813def@aol.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-bananafish@roughdraft.org Precedence: bulk Reply-To: bananafish@roughdraft.org The Voice of Mr. Insensitive: I'm glad they finally dragged his body out the river -- now I don't have to listen to this constant hand-wringing in NY media over what happened to him. Jim Omlor@aol.com wrote: > Michael, > > "...even if he's nowhere, he's in a better place than here..." > > Really? > > I like here. > > --John - * Unsubscribing? Mail majordomo@roughdraft.org with the message * UNSUBSCRIBE BANANAFISH From oconnort@panix.com Thu Mar 11 16:49:01 2004 Received: by dont.panix.com (8.11.6p2-a/8.8.8/PanixLC1.7) id i2BLn1O16279 for bananafish-outgoing; Thu, 11 Mar 2004 16:49:01 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <20040311195628.3559.qmail@web60901.mail.yahoo.com> Date: Thu, 11 Mar 2004 11:56:28 -0800 (PST) From: City Cabin Subject: Hemingway re JDS To: bananafish@roughdraft.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Sender: owner-bananafish@roughdraft.org Precedence: bulk Reply-To: bananafish@roughdraft.org "Jesus, he has a helluva talent." So sayeth Papa. However: I can't pin down when, how or to whom Hemingway made this assessment. If one believes Alexander, the quote somehow gets said when JDS met Hemingway at the Ritz Hotel after the liberation of Paris in '44. And if one believes Alexander's endnotes, Time magazine and then Warren French attest to it. (Time would be the first since it predates French by two years. But Time doesn't have endnotes, and I'm sure French is merely parroting Time. The (sole?) source of the JDS/Hemingway Ritz meeting is Salinger's letter to Whit Burnett on September 9, 1944. There are 2 paragraphs regarding this. H's biographer glosses it as: "He found Hemingway both friendly and generous, not at all impressed by his own eminence, and "soft"--as opposed to the hardness and toughness which some of some his writing suggested. They got on well, and Ernest volunteered to look at some of his work. Salinger returned to his unit in a state of mild exaltation." In Alexander's version, Hemingway reads "Last Day of the Last Furlough" on the spot. And then, perhaps, speaks aloud the quote which heads this post. (I kind of doubt JD includes the quote in his letter to Burnett--the construction of the quote wouldn't make sense in Salinger's letter.) In the 900-page Selected Letters of H. neither JDS nor any of his works is mentioned. H. wrote a great many letters, and I refer you to: http://www.hemingwaysociety.org/lettersproj.htm (I imagine when this project is completed, we'll be in a much better position to see Hemingway's assessment of JDS.) The Hemingway critic Michael Reynolds contends that H. read Catcher shortly after it came out, and it influenced the sibling relationship in the contemporaneous story "The Last Good Country." He doesn't document this to my satisfaction; however we *do* know that H. owned copies of both Catcher and Nine Stories. The composite library of H. is listed item-by-item in a book, and the two JDS titles are: No. 5769 Catcher, and No. 5770 Nine Stories. Both were housed in the library at H's home, Finca Vigia, in San Francisco de Paula, Cuba. --Bruce __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Search - Find what you’re looking for faster http://search.yahoo.com - * Unsubscribing? Mail majordomo@roughdraft.org with the message * UNSUBSCRIBE BANANAFISH From oconnort@panix.com Thu Mar 11 16:49:00 2004 Received: by dont.panix.com (8.11.6p2-a/8.8.8/PanixLC1.7) id i2BLn0I16262 for bananafish-outgoing; Thu, 11 Mar 2004 16:49:00 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <200403111807.i2BI7g94019837@theseus.peterson.af.mil> From: Yocum Daniel R Civ 21 CES/CEOE To: "'bananafish@roughdraft.org'" Subject: RE: Sad news Date: Thu, 11 Mar 2004 18:07:38 -0000 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2657.72) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Sender: owner-bananafish@roughdraft.org Precedence: bulk Reply-To: bananafish@roughdraft.org Dammit Jim, the fish gotta' eat same as the worms. Daniel The Voice of Mr. Insensitive: I'm glad they finally dragged his body out the river -- now I don't have to listen to this constant hand-wringing in NY media over what happened to him. Jim Omlor@aol.com wrote: > Michael, > > "...even if he's nowhere, he's in a better place than here..." > > Really? > > I like here. > > --John - * Unsubscribing? Mail majordomo@roughdraft.org with the message * UNSUBSCRIBE BANANAFISH - * Unsubscribing? Mail majordomo@roughdraft.org with the message * UNSUBSCRIBE BANANAFISH From oconnort@panix.com Thu Mar 11 16:49:00 2004 Received: from localhost (localhost [[UNIX: localhost]]) by dont.panix.com (8.11.6p2-a/8.8.8/PanixLC1.7) id i2BLn0i16261 for bananafish-outgoing; Thu, 11 Mar 2004 16:49:00 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <20040311174105.91058.qmail@web60904.mail.yahoo.com> Date: Thu, 11 Mar 2004 09:41:05 -0800 (PST) From: City Cabin Subject: Re: Heroic Nun Taught Catcher To: bananafish@roughdraft.org In-Reply-To: <4744329.1078889257979.JavaMail.nowekm1@southernct.edu> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Sender: owner-bananafish@roughdraft.org Precedence: bulk Reply-To: bananafish@roughdraft.org --- Michael Allen Nowek wrote: > Is that all there > is about the nun in > that letter? Yes, it was just that one sentence. --Bruce __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Search - Find what you’re looking for faster http://search.yahoo.com - * Unsubscribing? Mail majordomo@roughdraft.org with the message * UNSUBSCRIBE BANANAFISH From oconnort@panix.com Thu Mar 11 16:49:01 2004 Received: by dont.panix.com (8.11.6p2-a/8.8.8/PanixLC1.7) id i2BLn1516273 for bananafish-outgoing; Thu, 11 Mar 2004 16:49:01 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <200403111819.i2BIJN6m026958@theseus.peterson.af.mil> From: Yocum Daniel R Civ 21 CES/CEOE To: "'bananafish@roughdraft.org'" Subject: RE: Sad news Date: Thu, 11 Mar 2004 18:19:15 -0000 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2657.72) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Sender: owner-bananafish@roughdraft.org Precedence: bulk Reply-To: bananafish@roughdraft.org Ever wonder how fast lightning would be if it didn't zigzag? Daniel yeah. i like it here too. but there's a better place that we will like better. it's called nowhere. nowhere you've ever been. but i know. because i've been dead before. three years ago. it was neat. but i don't like to talk about it too much. spoil the surprise. all the best, --mike ;) >>> Omlor@aol.com 03/11/04 06:50AM >>> Michael, "...even if he's nowhere, he's in a better place than here..." Really? I like here. --John - * Unsubscribing? Mail majordomo@roughdraft.org with the message * UNSUBSCRIBE BANANAFISH - * Unsubscribing? Mail majordomo@roughdraft.org with the message * UNSUBSCRIBE BANANAFISH From oconnort@panix.com Thu Mar 11 16:49:01 2004 Received: by dont.panix.com (8.11.6p2-a/8.8.8/PanixLC1.7) id i2BLn1o16274 for bananafish-outgoing; Thu, 11 Mar 2004 16:49:01 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <200403111823.i2BINv4v029425@theseus.peterson.af.mil> From: Yocum Daniel R Civ 21 CES/CEOE To: "'bananafish@roughdraft.org'" Subject: RE: bouncing ball Date: Thu, 11 Mar 2004 18:23:48 -0000 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2657.72) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Sender: owner-bananafish@roughdraft.org Precedence: bulk Reply-To: bananafish@roughdraft.org Scottie, if you leave the apostrophe of the "As" you must add another s, one or the other, no two ways about it. Daniel '... I, for one, love student evaluations. They're the best thing in my vita ...' I can well imagine, John. You certainly get straight As from me. Scottie B. - * Unsubscribing? Mail majordomo@roughdraft.org with the message * UNSUBSCRIBE BANANAFISH From oconnort@panix.com Thu Mar 11 19:07:01 2004 Received: from localhost (localhost [[UNIX: localhost]]) by dont.panix.com (8.11.6p2-a/8.8.8/PanixLC1.7) id i2C071024383 for bananafish-outgoing; Thu, 11 Mar 2004 19:07:01 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <20040311215257.29195.qmail@web13912.mail.yahoo.com> Date: Thu, 11 Mar 2004 13:52:57 -0800 (PST) From: David Johnson Subject: Re: Hemingway re JDS To: bananafish@roughdraft.org In-Reply-To: <20040311195628.3559.qmail@web60901.mail.yahoo.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="0-907437607-1079041977=:28507" Sender: owner-bananafish@roughdraft.org Precedence: bulk Reply-To: bananafish@roughdraft.org --0-907437607-1079041977=:28507 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Bruce, Isn't Salinger mentioned in Carlos Baker's bio of Hemingway? You might try running a check there... David J. City Cabin wrote: "Jesus, he has a helluva talent." So sayeth Papa. However: I can't pin down when, how or to whom Hemingway made this assessment. If one believes Alexander, the quote somehow gets said when JDS met Hemingway at the Ritz Hotel after the liberation of Paris in '44. And if one believes Alexander's endnotes, Time magazine and then Warren French attest to it. (Time would be the first since it predates French by two years. But Time doesn't have endnotes, and I'm sure French is merely parroting Time. The (sole?) source of the JDS/Hemingway Ritz meeting is Salinger's letter to Whit Burnett on September 9, 1944. There are 2 paragraphs regarding this. H's biographer glosses it as: "He found Hemingway both friendly and generous, not at all impressed by his own eminence, and "soft"--as opposed to the hardness and toughness which some of some his writing suggested. They got on well, and Ernest volunteered to look at some of his work. Salinger returned to his unit in a state of mild exaltation." In Alexander's version, Hemingway reads "Last Day of the Last Furlough" on the spot. And then, perhaps, speaks aloud the quote which heads this post. (I kind of doubt JD includes the quote in his letter to Burnett--the construction of the quote wouldn't make sense in Salinger's letter.) In the 900-page Selected Letters of H. neither JDS nor any of his works is mentioned. H. wrote a great many letters, and I refer you to: http://www.hemingwaysociety.org/lettersproj.htm (I imagine when this project is completed, we'll be in a much better position to see Hemingway's assessment of JDS.) The Hemingway critic Michael Reynolds contends that H. read Catcher shortly after it came out, and it influenced the sibling relationship in the contemporaneous story "The Last Good Country." He doesn't document this to my satisfaction; however we *do* know that H. owned copies of both Catcher and Nine Stories. The composite library of H. is listed item-by-item in a book, and the two JDS titles are: No. 5769 Catcher, and No. 5770 Nine Stories. Both were housed in the library at H's home, Finca Vigia, in San Francisco de Paula, Cuba. --Bruce __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Search - Find what you’re looking for faster http://search.yahoo.com - * Unsubscribing? Mail majordomo@roughdraft.org with the message * UNSUBSCRIBE BANANAFISH --------------------------------- Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Finance: Get your refund fast by filing online --0-907437607-1079041977=:28507 Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii
Bruce,
Isn't Salinger mentioned in Carlos Baker's bio of Hemingway?  You might try running a check there...
David J.

City Cabin <citycabn@yahoo.com> wrote:
"Jesus, he has a helluva talent."

So sayeth Papa.

However:

I can't pin down when, how or to whom Hemingway made
this assessment. If one believes Alexander, the quote
somehow gets said when JDS met Hemingway at the Ritz
Hotel after the liberation of Paris in '44. And if
one believes Alexander's endnotes, Time magazine and
then Warren French attest to it. (Time would be the
first since it predates French by two years. But Time
doesn't have endnotes, and I'm sure French is merely
parroting Time.

The (sole?) source of the JDS/Hemingway Ritz meeting
is Salinger's letter to Whit Burnett on September 9,
1944. There are 2 paragraphs regarding this. H's
biographer glosses it as: "He found Hemingway both
friendly and generous, not at all impressed by his own
eminence, and "soft"--as opposed to the hardness and
toughne ss which some of some his writing suggested.
They got on well, and Ernest volunteered to look at
some of his work. Salinger returned to his unit in a
state of mild exaltation."

In Alexander's version, Hemingway reads "Last Day of
the Last Furlough" on the spot. And then, perhaps,
speaks aloud the quote which heads this post. (I kind
of doubt JD includes the quote in his letter to
Burnett--the construction of the quote wouldn't make
sense in Salinger's letter.)

In the 900-page Selected Letters of H. neither JDS nor
any of his works is mentioned. H. wrote a great many
letters, and I refer you to:

http://www.hemingwaysociety.org/lettersproj.htm

(I imagine when this project is completed, we'll be in
a much better position to see Hemingway's assessment
of JDS.)

The Hemingway critic Michael Reynolds contends that H.
read Catcher shortly after it came out, and it
influenced the sibling relationship in the
contemporaneous story "The Last Good Country." He
doesn't document this to my satisfaction; however we
*do* know that H. owned copies of both Catcher and
Nine Stories. The composite library of H. is listed
item-by-item in a book, and the two JDS titles are:
No. 5769 Catcher, and No. 5770 Nine Stories. Both
were housed in the library at H's home, Finca Vigia,
in San Francisco de Paula, Cuba.

--Bruce

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Search - Find what you’re looking for faster
http://search.yahoo.com
-
* Unsubscribing? Mail majordomo@roughdraft.org with the message
* UNSUBSCRIBE BANANAFISH

Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Finance: Get your refund fast by filing online --0-907437607-1079041977=:28507-- - * Unsubscribing? Mail majordomo@roughdraft.org with the message * UNSUBSCRIBE BANANAFISH From oconnort@panix.com Thu Mar 11 19:07:00 2004 Received: by dont.panix.com (8.11.6p2-a/8.8.8/PanixLC1.7) id i2C070024371 for bananafish-outgoing; Thu, 11 Mar 2004 19:07:00 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <20040311214920.17276.qmail@web40109.mail.yahoo.com> Date: Thu, 11 Mar 2004 13:49:20 -0800 (PST) From: ana buneta Subject: ((((())))) To: bananafish@roughdraft.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Sender: owner-bananafish@roughdraft.org Precedence: bulk Reply-To: bananafish@roughdraft.org Dear all, Just shortly. As I understood from last posts somebody died, and somebody left the game because he was insulted from person who didn’t really wanted to insult him, which is discussible as well as reaction of the person who left the list, who’s name is Will? I just wanted to inform you that I joined the list (some time ago but just started to read it) and don’t understand everything so good, but understand enough to understand most of it... :) and the truth is, I really don’t understand what’s that got to do with Salinger? :) but, I guess since you started the list in 1997. you already said much, and I hope I’ll find the time to read the archive. So, I’m Ana. (is there any other female on the list?) and I’m from Croatia. And that makes a bit problem with my English :( so, if and when I start being active on the list, you’ll have the opportunity to see english with croatian syntax. :) Salinger. We have those 4books translated in croatian (Nine Stories, Raise High the Roof-Beam, Carpenters and Seymour: An Introduction, Franny and Zooe &, The Catcher in the Rye.) and I didn’t read the other stories/book. I know we are losing much in translation, but due to my english, I’m losing more reading it in original. But I’ll try to get the other books on english... what else? Jeah, those 4books, I read few times, but some time ago... at some point of my personal search I gave them away, and didn’t read them for some time... so before writing anything I’ll need time to reread them again. (and I’ll need time to read the archive)... but I hope I’ll fit the list at some point... That’s all for now. ab ><><>< ===== IF YOU LOOK FOR TRUTH, YOU MAY FIND COMFORT IN THE END; IF YOU LOOK FOR COMFORT, YOU WILL NOT GET EITHER COMFORT OR TRUTH- ONLY SOFTSOAP AND WISHFUL THINKING TO BEGIN WITH AND, IN THE END, DESPAIR. (C.S.Lewis) __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Search - Find what you’re looking for faster http://search.yahoo.com - * Unsubscribing? Mail majordomo@roughdraft.org with the message * UNSUBSCRIBE BANANAFISH From oconnort@panix.com Thu Mar 11 19:07:00 2004 Received: from localhost (localhost [[UNIX: localhost]]) by dont.panix.com (8.11.6p2-a/8.8.8/PanixLC1.7) id i2C070W24354 for bananafish-outgoing; Thu, 11 Mar 2004 19:07:00 -0500 (EST) X400-Received: by mta Salem-MTA1 in /c=US/admd= /prmd=or.gov/; Relayed; 11 Mar 2004 14:34:30 -0800 X400-Received: by /c=US/admd= /prmd=or.gov/; Relayed; 11 Mar 2004 14:34:30 -0800 X400-MTS-Identifier: [/c=US/admd= /prmd=or.gov/; 4050E914.ADC2.001F.000] Content-Identifier: 05F3C4050E97605D Content-Return: Allowed X400-Content-Type: P2-1988 ( 22 ) Conversion: Allowed Original-Encoded-Information-Types: IA5-Text Disclose-Recipients: Prohibited Alternate-Recipient: Allowed X400-Originator: Michael.J.Anello@state.or.us X400-Recipients: non-disclosure; Message-Id: <4050E914.ADC2.001F.000*/c=us/admd=/prmd=or.gov/o=HR/ou=gwise/s=Anello/g=Michael/i=J/@MHS> Date: 11 Mar 2004 14:34:30 -0800 From: ANELLO Michael J To: bananafish@roughdraft.org, daniel.yocum@Peterson.af.mil Subject: RE: Sad news Sender: owner-bananafish@roughdraft.org Precedence: bulk Reply-To: bananafish@roughdraft.org negative one squared mph. all the best, daniel ;) -mike >>> daniel.yocum@Peterson.af.mil 03/11/04 01:51PM >>> Ever wonder how fast lightning would be if it didn't zigzag? Daniel yeah. i like it here too. but there's a better place that we will like better. it's called nowhere. nowhere you've ever been. but i know. because i've been dead before. three years ago. it was neat. but i don't like to talk about it too much. spoil the surprise. all the best, --mike ;) - * Unsubscribing? Mail majordomo@roughdraft.org with the message * UNSUBSCRIBE BANANAFISH From oconnort@panix.com Thu Mar 11 20:46:56 2004 Received: by dont.panix.com (8.11.6p2-a/8.8.8/PanixLC1.7) id i2C1kup28432 for bananafish-outgoing; Thu, 11 Mar 2004 20:46:56 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <20040312003311.71484.qmail@web60908.mail.yahoo.com> Date: Thu, 11 Mar 2004 16:33:11 -0800 (PST) From: City Cabin Subject: Re: Hemingway re JDS To: bananafish@roughdraft.org In-Reply-To: <20040311215257.29195.qmail@web13912.mail.yahoo.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Sender: owner-bananafish@roughdraft.org Precedence: bulk Reply-To: bananafish@roughdraft.org --- David Johnson wrote: > Bruce, > Isn't Salinger mentioned in Carlos Baker's bio of > Hemingway? David, Yes, he is. After sending the post I realized I failed to type "Baker" in the phrase "H's biographer [Baker] glosses" in the paragraph below. > > The (sole?) source of the JDS/Hemingway Ritz meeting > is Salinger's letter to Whit Burnett on September 9, > 1944. There are 2 paragraphs regarding this. H's > biographer glosses it as: "He found Hemingway both > friendly and generous, not at all impressed by his > own > eminence, and "soft"--as opposed to the hardness and > toughness which some of some his writing suggested. > They got on well, and Ernest volunteered to look at > some of his work. Salinger returned to his unit in a > state of mild exaltation." > Baker also glosses JDS's elusive 1946 letter to Hemingway where JDS talks about his breakdown, writing a play about Holden and Phoebe, and "his talks with Ernest in Europe had given him his only hopeful minutes of the entire war, and named himself national chairman of the Hemingway Fan Clubs." (Alexander glosses even more of this letter; however, I've never seen the actual text of the letter. Ahem, hint, hint.) But since I was only covering H. re JDS, and not JDS re H., I left that out. I think one could, with some diligent rereading, work up a substantial post concerning JDS re H. --Bruce __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Search - Find what you’re looking for faster http://search.yahoo.com - * Unsubscribing? Mail majordomo@roughdraft.org with the message * UNSUBSCRIBE BANANAFISH From oconnort@panix.com Thu Mar 11 20:46:56 2004 Received: by dont.panix.com (8.11.6p2-a/8.8.8/PanixLC1.7) id i2C1kuS28433 for bananafish-outgoing; Thu, 11 Mar 2004 20:46:56 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <405115C4.1060802@drew.edu> Date: Thu, 11 Mar 2004 20:43:32 -0500 From: James Rovira User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.4) Gecko/20030624 Netscape/7.1 (ax) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: bananafish@roughdraft.org Subject: Re: ((((())))) References: <20040311214920.17276.qmail@web40109.mail.yahoo.com> In-Reply-To: <20040311214920.17276.qmail@web40109.mail.yahoo.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-bananafish@roughdraft.org Precedence: bulk Reply-To: bananafish@roughdraft.org Ha :). Welcome to the list, Ana, and no, none of it has anything to do with Salinger, but yes, you can post anything you want about him. I think one thing that'd be really interesting is if you posted your impressions of Catcher in the Rye after reading it in Croatian...what do you think is lost in translation? What do you think still comes across? Jim - * Unsubscribing? Mail majordomo@roughdraft.org with the message * UNSUBSCRIBE BANANAFISH From oconnort@panix.com Thu Mar 11 20:46:54 2004 Received: from localhost (localhost [[UNIX: localhost]]) by dont.panix.com (8.11.6p2-a/8.8.8/PanixLC1.7) id i2C1ksl28410 for bananafish-outgoing; Thu, 11 Mar 2004 20:46:54 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <200403120014.i2C0EiuT002836@theseus.peterson.af.mil> From: Yocum Daniel R Civ 21 CES/CEOE To: "'bananafish@roughdraft.org'" Subject: RE: ((((())))) Date: Fri, 12 Mar 2004 00:14:35 -0000 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2657.72) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Sender: owner-bananafish@roughdraft.org Precedence: bulk Reply-To: bananafish@roughdraft.org Ana, I'm a C.S. Lewis fan also. Daniel That's all for now. ab ><><>< ===== IF YOU LOOK FOR TRUTH, YOU MAY FIND COMFORT IN THE END; IF YOU LOOK FOR COMFORT, YOU WILL NOT GET EITHER COMFORT OR TRUTH- ONLY SOFTSOAP AND WISHFUL THINKING TO BEGIN WITH AND, IN THE END, DESPAIR. (C.S.Lewis) - * Unsubscribing? Mail majordomo@roughdraft.org with the message * UNSUBSCRIBE BANANAFISH From oconnort@panix.com Thu Mar 11 20:46:55 2004 Received: by dont.panix.com (8.11.6p2-a/8.8.8/PanixLC1.7) id i2C1ktN28422 for bananafish-outgoing; Thu, 11 Mar 2004 20:46:55 -0500 (EST) From: Omlor@aol.com Message-ID: <8d.58a1d54.2d825e43@aol.com> Date: Thu, 11 Mar 2004 19:28:51 EST Subject: Re: Sad news To: bananafish@roughdraft.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="part1_8d.58a1d54.2d825e43_boundary" X-Mailer: 6.0 sub 10581 Sender: owner-bananafish@roughdraft.org Precedence: bulk Reply-To: bananafish@roughdraft.org --part1_8d.58a1d54.2d825e43_boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Mike explains, "...but there's a better place that we will like better." Ah, so it's only that again. I understand now. Thanks, --John --part1_8d.58a1d54.2d825e43_boundary Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Mike explains,

"...but there's a better place that we will like better."

Ah, so it's only that again.

I understand now.

Thanks,

--John --part1_8d.58a1d54.2d825e43_boundary-- - * Unsubscribing? Mail majordomo@roughdraft.org with the message * UNSUBSCRIBE BANANAFISH From oconnort@panix.com Thu Mar 11 20:46:55 2004 Received: by dont.panix.com (8.11.6p2-a/8.8.8/PanixLC1.7) id i2C1kt928416 for bananafish-outgoing; Thu, 11 Mar 2004 20:46:55 -0500 (EST) From: Omlor@aol.com Message-ID: <97.4530c508.2d825dba@aol.com> Date: Thu, 11 Mar 2004 19:26:34 EST Subject: Re: Hemingway re JDS To: bananafish@roughdraft.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="part1_97.4530c508.2d825dba_boundary" X-Mailer: 6.0 sub 10581 Sender: owner-bananafish@roughdraft.org Precedence: bulk Reply-To: bananafish@roughdraft.org --part1_97.4530c508.2d825dba_boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit David, Actually, I think Bruce is quoting from the Baker in his own post. The lines, "He found Hemingway both friendly and generous, not at all impressed by his own eminence, and 'soft' -- as opposed to the hardness and toughness which some of some his writing suggested. They got on well, and Ernest volunteered to look at some of his work. Salinger returned to his unit in a state of mild exaltation." come from Baker, 533 in the paperback. All the best, --John --part1_97.4530c508.2d825dba_boundary Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable David,

Actually, I think Bruce is quoting from the Baker in his own post.  = ;The lines,=20

"He found Hemingway both friendly and generous, not at all impressed by=20= his own eminence, and 'soft' -- as opposed to the hardness and toughness whi= ch some of some his writing suggested.  They got on well, and Ernest vo= lunteered to look at some of his work. Salinger returned to his unit in a st= ate of mild exaltation."=20

come from Baker, 533 in the paperback.

All the best,

--John


--part1_97.4530c508.2d825dba_boundary-- - * Unsubscribing? Mail majordomo@roughdraft.org with the message * UNSUBSCRIBE BANANAFISH From oconnort@panix.com Fri Mar 12 00:00:16 2004 Received: from localhost (localhost [[UNIX: localhost]]) by dont.panix.com (8.11.6p2-a/8.8.8/PanixLC1.7) id i2C50Gx07124 for bananafish-outgoing; Fri, 12 Mar 2004 00:00:16 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <20040312045213.87487.qmail@web10304.mail.yahoo.com> Date: Thu, 11 Mar 2004 23:52:13 -0500 (EST) From: Anne "Thériault" Subject: RE: ((((())))) To: bananafish@roughdraft.org In-Reply-To: <200403120014.i2C0EiuT002836@theseus.peterson.af.mil> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Sender: owner-bananafish@roughdraft.org Precedence: bulk Reply-To: bananafish@roughdraft.org Me too! I especially like the Screwtape Letters. Although... I'm usually too shy to write anything on here... ~Anne --- Yocum Daniel R Civ 21 CES/CEOE wrote: > Ana, I'm a C.S. Lewis fan also. > Daniel > > > > > That's all for now. > ab > ><><>< > > > ===== > IF YOU LOOK FOR TRUTH, YOU MAY FIND COMFORT IN THE > END; > IF YOU LOOK FOR COMFORT, YOU WILL NOT GET EITHER > COMFORT OR TRUTH- > ONLY SOFTSOAP AND WISHFUL THINKING TO BEGIN WITH > AND, IN THE END, DESPAIR. > (C.S.Lewis) > - > * Unsubscribing? Mail majordomo@roughdraft.org with > the message > * UNSUBSCRIBE BANANAFISH ______________________________________________________________________ Post your free ad now! http://personals.yahoo.ca - * Unsubscribing? Mail majordomo@roughdraft.org with the message * UNSUBSCRIBE BANANAFISH From oconnort@panix.com Fri Mar 12 08:07:37 2004 Received: from localhost (localhost [[UNIX: localhost]]) by dont.panix.com (8.11.6p2-a/8.8.8/PanixLC1.7) id i2CD7b022854 for bananafish-outgoing; Fri, 12 Mar 2004 08:07:37 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <20040312083452.43404.qmail@web25008.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> Date: Fri, 12 Mar 2004 08:34:52 +0000 (GMT) From: =?iso-8859-1?q?Lucy=20Pearson?= Subject: Re: bananafish-digest V1 #1023 To: bananafish@roughdraft.org In-Reply-To: <200403120147.i2C1lNI28496@dont.panix.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="0-222949718-1079080492=:43219" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Sender: owner-bananafish@roughdraft.org Precedence: bulk Reply-To: bananafish@roughdraft.org --0-222949718-1079080492=:43219 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Hi Ana! Welcome to the list :-) You are not the only female on the list, there are quite a few, but we all seem to have been lurking lately. A shame, really, some of the best posters are staying quiet at the moment (where are you Cecilia?). You are not the only European, either, but I think you might be the first Croatian. Don't be surprised if lots of discussion is not about Salinger, but please post your questions and ideas. We need new blood to get us going again - since there are only 4 books, it's easy to get off topic. (By the way, do you know that the books you listed are the only published works? There are some other stories, but they have never been published in book form. They are around, though, in magazines and occasionally illegally on internet sites.) Well, that's all for now. Welcome again :-) Lucy-Ruth Date: Thu, 11 Mar 2004 13:49:20 -0800 (PST) From: ana buneta Subject: ((((())))) Dear all, Just shortly. As I understood from last posts somebody died, and somebody left the game because he was insulted from person who didn’t really wanted to insult him, which is discussible as well as reaction of the person who left the list, who’s name is Will? I just wanted to inform you that I joined the list (some time ago but just started to read it) and don’t understand everything so good, but understand enough to understand most of it... :) and the truth is, I really don’t understand what’s that got to do with Salinger? :) but, I guess since you started the list in 1997. you already said much, and I hope I’ll find the time to read the archive. So, I’m Ana. (is there any other female on the list?) and I’m from Croatia. And that makes a bit problem with my English :( so, if and when I start being active on the list, you’ll have the opportunity to see english with croatian syntax. :) Salinger. We have those 4books translated in croatian (Nine Stories, Raise High the Roof-Beam, Carpenters and Seymour: An Introduction, Franny and Zooe &, The Catcher in the Rye.) and I didn’t read the other stories/book. I know we are losing much in translation, but due to my english, I’m losing more reading it in original. But I’ll try to get the other books on english... what else? Jeah, those 4books, I read few times, but some time ago... at some point of my personal search I gave them away, and didn’t read them for some time... so before writing anything I’ll need time to reread them again. (and I’ll need time to read the archive)... but I hope I’ll fit the list at some point... That’s all for now. ab ><><>< ===== IF YOU LOOK FOR TRUTH, YOU MAY FIND COMFORT IN THE END; IF YOU LOOK FOR COMFORT, YOU WILL NOT GET EITHER COMFORT OR TRUTH- ONLY SOFTSOAP AND WISHFUL THINKING TO BEGIN WITH AND, IN THE END, DESPAIR. (C.S.Lewis) --------------------------------- Yahoo! Messenger - Communicate instantly..."Ping" your friends today! Download Messenger Now --0-222949718-1079080492=:43219 Content-Type: text/html; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Hi Ana! Welcome to the list :-)
 
You are not the only female on the list, there are quite a few, but we all seem to have been lurking lately. A shame, really, some of the best posters are staying quiet at the moment (where are you Cecilia?). You are not the only European, either, but I think you might be the first Croatian.
 
Don't be surprised if lots of discussion is not about Salinger, but please post your questions and ideas. We need new blood to get us going again - since there are only 4 books, it's easy to get off topic. (By the way, do you know that the books you listed are the only published works? There are some other stories, but they have never been published in book form. They are around, though, in magazines and occasionally illegally on internet sites.)
 
Well, that's all for now. Welcome again :-)
 
Lucy-Ruth
 
Date: Thu, 11 Mar 2004 13:49:20 -0800 (PST)
From: ana buneta <ab_ri@yahoo.com>
Subject: ((((()))))

Dear all,
Just shortly.
As I understood from last posts somebody died, and somebody left the
game because he was insulted
from person who didn’t really wanted to insult him, which is
discussible as well as reaction of
the person who left the list, who’s name is Will?
I just wanted to inform you that I joined the list (some time ago but
just started to read it) and
don’t understand everything so good, but understand enough to
understand most of it... :) and the
truth is, I really don’t understand what’s that got to do with
Salinger? :) but, I guess since you
started the list in 1997. you already said much, and I hope I’ll find
the time to read the
archive. So, I’m Ana. (is there any other female on the list?) and I’m from
Croatia. And that makes a bit
problem with my English :( so, if and when I start being active on the
list, you’ll have the
opportunity to see english with croatian syntax. :)
Salinger. We have those 4books translated in croatian  (Nine Stories,
Raise High the Roof-Beam,
Carpenters and Seymour: An Introduction, Franny and Zooe &, The Catcher
in the Rye.) and I didn’t
read the other stories/book. I know we are losing much in translation,
but due to my english, I’m
losing more reading it in original. But I’ll try to get the other books
on english... what else?
Jeah, those 4books, I read few times, but some time ago... at some
point of my personal search I
gave them away, and didn’t read them for some time... so before writing
anything I’ll need time to
reread them again. (and I’ll need time to read the archive)... but I
hope I’ll fit the list at
some point...
That’s all for now.
ab
><><><


=====
IF YOU LOOK FOR TRUTH, YOU MAY FIND COMFORT IN THE END;
IF YOU LOOK FOR COMFORT, YOU WILL NOT GET EITHER COMFORT OR TRUTH-
ONLY SOFTSOAP AND WISHFUL THINKING TO BEGIN WITH AND, IN THE END,
DESPAIR.
(C.S.Lewis)

Yahoo! Messenger - Communicate instantly..."Ping" your friends today! Download Messenger Now --0-222949718-1079080492=:43219-- - * Unsubscribing? Mail majordomo@roughdraft.org with the message * UNSUBSCRIBE BANANAFISH From oconnort@panix.com Fri Mar 12 13:29:36 2004 Received: from localhost (localhost [[UNIX: localhost]]) by dont.panix.com (8.11.6p2-a/8.8.8/PanixLC1.7) id i2CITa704938 for bananafish-outgoing; Fri, 12 Mar 2004 13:29:36 -0500 (EST) X400-Received: by mta Salem-MTA1 in /c=US/admd= /prmd=or.gov/; Relayed; 12 Mar 2004 08:09:10 -0800 X400-Received: by /c=US/admd= /prmd=or.gov/; Relayed; 12 Mar 2004 08:09:10 -0800 X400-MTS-Identifier: [/c=US/admd= /prmd=or.gov/; 4051E09C.ADC2.3713.000] Content-Identifier: 05A4E4051E0A6005 Content-Return: Allowed X400-Content-Type: P2-1988 ( 22 ) Conversion: Allowed Original-Encoded-Information-Types: IA5-Text Disclose-Recipients: Prohibited Alternate-Recipient: Allowed X400-Originator: Michael.J.Anello@state.or.us X400-Recipients: non-disclosure; Message-Id: <4051E09C.ADC2.3713.000*/c=us/admd=/prmd=or.gov/o=HR/ou=gwise/s=Anello/g=Michael/i=J/@MHS> Date: 12 Mar 2004 08:09:10 -0800 From: ANELLO Michael J To: bananafish@roughdraft.org, ruby_twitch@yahoo.com Subject: RE: ((((())))) Sender: owner-bananafish@roughdraft.org Precedence: bulk Reply-To: bananafish@roughdraft.org anne, what are the screwtape letters about? i've never read them and i prefer shy people to fill me in. they always only tell me the right stuff. -mike >>> ruby_twitch@yahoo.com 03/11/04 09:00PM >>> Me too! I especially like the Screwtape Letters. Although... I'm usually too shy to write anything on here... ~Anne --- Yocum Daniel R Civ 21 CES/CEOE wrote: > Ana, I'm a C.S. Lewis fan also. > Daniel > > > > > That's all for now. > ab > ><><>< > > > ===== > IF YOU LOOK FOR TRUTH, YOU MAY FIND COMFORT IN THE > END; > IF YOU LOOK FOR COMFORT, YOU WILL NOT GET EITHER > COMFORT OR TRUTH- > ONLY SOFTSOAP AND WISHFUL THINKING TO BEGIN WITH > AND, IN THE END, DESPAIR. > (C.S.Lewis) > - > * Unsubscribing? Mail majordomo@roughdraft.org with > the message > * UNSUBSCRIBE BANANAFISH ______________________________________________________________________ Post your free ad now! http://personals.yahoo.ca - * Unsubscribing? Mail majordomo@roughdraft.org with the message * UNSUBSCRIBE BANANAFISH - * Unsubscribing? Mail majordomo@roughdraft.org with the message * UNSUBSCRIBE BANANAFISH From oconnort@panix.com Fri Mar 12 13:29:35 2004 Received: from localhost (localhost [[UNIX: localhost]]) by dont.panix.com (8.11.6p2-a/8.8.8/PanixLC1.7) id i2CITZV04927 for bananafish-outgoing; Fri, 12 Mar 2004 13:29:35 -0500 (EST) X400-Received: by mta Salem-MTA1 in /c=US/admd= /prmd=or.gov/; Relayed; 12 Mar 2004 08:08:08 -0800 X400-Received: by /c=US/admd= /prmd=or.gov/; Relayed; 12 Mar 2004 08:08:08 -0800 X400-MTS-Identifier: [/c=US/admd= /prmd=or.gov/; 4051E060.ADC2.36E0.000] Content-Identifier: 056214051E068005 Content-Return: Allowed X400-Content-Type: P2-1988 ( 22 ) Conversion: Allowed Original-Encoded-Information-Types: IA5-Text Disclose-Recipients: Prohibited Alternate-Recipient: Allowed X400-Originator: Michael.J.Anello@state.or.us X400-Recipients: non-disclosure; Message-Id: <4051E060.ADC2.36E0.000*/c=us/admd=/prmd=or.gov/o=HR/ou=gwise/s=Anello/g=Michael/i=J/@MHS> Date: 12 Mar 2004 08:08:08 -0800 From: ANELLO Michael J To: bananafish@roughdraft.org, Omlor@aol.com Subject: Re: Sad news Sender: owner-bananafish@roughdraft.org Precedence: bulk Reply-To: bananafish@roughdraft.org my bad. jehovah's witnesses caught me goin' out the door that day. but i'm all better now. we're all going straight to hell. -mike >>> Omlor@aol.com 03/11/04 05:48PM >>> Mike explains, "...but there's a better place that we will like better." Ah, so it's only that again. I understand now. Thanks, --John - * Unsubscribing? Mail majordomo@roughdraft.org with the message * UNSUBSCRIBE BANANAFISH From oconnort@panix.com Fri Mar 12 13:29:36 2004 Received: by dont.panix.com (8.11.6p2-a/8.8.8/PanixLC1.7) id i2CITaN04933 for bananafish-outgoing; Fri, 12 Mar 2004 13:29:36 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <4051C659.3050800@drew.edu> Date: Fri, 12 Mar 2004 09:16:57 -0500 From: James Rovira User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.3) Gecko/20030312 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: bananafish@roughdraft.org Subject: Re: ((((())))) References: <20040312045213.87487.qmail@web10304.mail.yahoo.com> In-Reply-To: <20040312045213.87487.qmail@web10304.mail.yahoo.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Sender: owner-bananafish@roughdraft.org Precedence: bulk Reply-To: bananafish@roughdraft.org Have you read _'Till We Have Faces_? I think it was the best thing he did. Jim Anne Thériault wrote: >Me too! I especially like the Screwtape Letters. >Although... I'm usually too shy to write anything on >here... >~Anne > > > > > - * Unsubscribing? Mail majordomo@roughdraft.org with the message * UNSUBSCRIBE BANANAFISH From oconnort@panix.com Sat Mar 13 00:49:17 2004 Received: from localhost (localhost [[UNIX: localhost]]) by dont.panix.com (8.11.6p2-a/8.8.8/PanixLC1.7) id i2D5nHE08510 for bananafish-outgoing; Sat, 13 Mar 2004 00:49:17 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <012901c40871$7cef22f0$c63bfcc1@GEORGES> From: =?iso-8859-1?Q?Val=E9rie_Aron?= To: References: <20040312083452.43404.qmail@web25008.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> Subject: Re: bananafish-digest V1 #1023 Date: Fri, 12 Mar 2004 21:34:45 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0126_01C40879.D6A06F40" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1158 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1165 Sender: owner-bananafish@roughdraft.org Precedence: bulk Reply-To: bananafish@roughdraft.org This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_0126_01C40879.D6A06F40 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hi Ana, Here I am, an other female, but since I only post to welcome new = subscribers, you' ll hardly hear from me in the future. So keep this = mail as a souvenir. Thank you. And welcome. Val=E9rie Aron ----- Original Message -----=20 From: Lucy Pearson=20 To: bananafish@roughdraft.org=20 Sent: Friday, March 12, 2004 9:34 AM Subject: Re: bananafish-digest V1 #1023 Hi Ana! Welcome to the list :-) You are not the only female on the list, there are quite a few, but we = all seem to have been lurking lately. A shame, really, some of the best = posters are staying quiet at the moment (where are you Cecilia?). You = are not the only European, either, but I think you might be the first = Croatian. Don't be surprised if lots of discussion is not about Salinger, but = please post your questions and ideas. We need new blood to get us going = again - since there are only 4 books, it's easy to get off topic. (By = the way, do you know that the books you listed are the only published = works? There are some other stories, but they have never been published = in book form. They are around, though, in magazines and occasionally = illegally on internet sites.) Well, that's all for now. Welcome again :-) Lucy-Ruth ------=_NextPart_000_0126_01C40879.D6A06F40 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Hi Ana,
Here I am, an other female, but since I = only post=20 to welcome new subscribers, you' ll hardly hear from me in the = future. So=20 keep this mail as a souvenir.
 
Thank you. And welcome.
 
Val=E9rie Aron
----- Original Message -----
From:=20 Lucy=20 Pearson
Sent: Friday, March 12, 2004 = 9:34=20 AM
Subject: Re: bananafish-digest = V1=20 #1023

Hi Ana! Welcome to the list :-)
 
You are not the only female on the list, there are quite a few, = but we=20 all seem to have been lurking lately. A shame, really, some of the = best=20 posters are staying quiet at the moment (where are you Cecilia?). You = are not=20 the only European, either, but I think you might be the first = Croatian.
 
Don't be surprised if lots of discussion is not about = Salinger, but=20 please post your questions and ideas. We need new blood to get us = going again=20 - since there are only 4 books, it's easy to get off topic. (By the = way, do=20 you know that the books you listed are the only published works? There = are=20 some other stories, but they have never been published in book form. = They are=20 around, though, in magazines and occasionally illegally on internet=20 sites.)
 
Well, that's all for now. Welcome again :-)
 
Lucy-Ruth
------=_NextPart_000_0126_01C40879.D6A06F40-- - * Unsubscribing? Mail majordomo@roughdraft.org with the message * UNSUBSCRIBE BANANAFISH From oconnort@panix.com Sat Mar 13 00:49:18 2004 Received: by dont.panix.com (8.11.6p2-a/8.8.8/PanixLC1.7) id i2D5nII08516 for bananafish-outgoing; Sat, 13 Mar 2004 00:49:18 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <20040313025927.40934.qmail@web40112.mail.yahoo.com> Date: Fri, 12 Mar 2004 18:59:27 -0800 (PST) From: ana buneta Subject: Re: ((((())))) To: bananafish@roughdraft.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Sender: owner-bananafish@roughdraft.org Precedence: bulk Reply-To: bananafish@roughdraft.org Hi all, Thanx for such a worm welcoming :) Just few things > Of course I don’t mind discussion about everything else but Salinger... :) I guess he would like that too :) specially about C.S.Lewis :)) this summer I saw some (old) movie about him (shadow land?)... I’m not sure if I’m his fan, I just like that quotation. :) > at first I thought that only (those) 4books are published... but then I took ‘J.D.Salinger and the critics’ (edited by Belcher and Lee) from university and read few critics that were discussing some stories I never heard about... so.... (did anybody read John Hermann thoughts on Esme - ‘J.D.Salinger- Hello, Hello, Hello’?) > I mentioned translations because I saw in archive some people discussing translations but I don’t think I’ll write about that... I’m not so much interested in that. My english is not so great, and I real like reading and writing on croatian, no matter what. I have Nine stories and Catcher on eng. and I read some parts on eng. But I’m not going to compare them. (sorry Jim. You know, what is still there is the essence, even in croatian :)) Maybe some other serbo-croatian-ex-yugoslavian will be willing to discuss translations. :) I hope so, it would be interesting for me. But I am more interested in moral questions, dilemmas that characters have, and their answers on them... in their complete system of believes and then of JDS. After that, i’m interested in it’s literature significance. And, as I wrote- I’ll need time to read and think before posting... Sometimes I’m wondering: what’s the point of discussing it with anybody else who is not JDS? But something for you (since JDS is not answering my phone calls :)) it seems that everybody hate Muriel. (like the site that C. send some time ago...) I don’t. but I’m a bit wondering why Seymour married her? And then, more important: why did he killed himself? Oh, it’s really time for bed. Night everybody ab ><><>< ===== IF YOU LOOK FOR TRUTH, YOU MAY FIND COMFORT IN THE END; IF YOU LOOK FOR COMFORT, YOU WILL NOT GET EITHER COMFORT OR TRUTH- ONLY SOFTSOAP AND WISHFUL THINKING TO BEGIN WITH AND, IN THE END, DESPAIR. (C.S.Lewis) __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail - More reliable, more storage, less spam http://mail.yahoo.com - * Unsubscribing? Mail majordomo@roughdraft.org with the message * UNSUBSCRIBE BANANAFISH From oconnort@panix.com Sat Mar 13 00:49:19 2004 Received: from localhost (localhost [[UNIX: localhost]]) by dont.panix.com (8.11.6p2-a/8.8.8/PanixLC1.7) id i2D5nJ108521 for bananafish-outgoing; Sat, 13 Mar 2004 00:49:19 -0500 (EST) From: Omlor@aol.com Message-ID: <7d.48f8f281.2d83e204@aol.com> Date: Fri, 12 Mar 2004 23:03:16 EST Subject: Future Writers of America To: bananafish@roughdraft.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="part1_7d.48f8f281.2d83e204_boundary" X-Mailer: 6.0 sub 10581 Sender: owner-bananafish@roughdraft.org Precedence: bulk Reply-To: bananafish@roughdraft.org --part1_7d.48f8f281.2d83e204_boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Don't know why, but some of these broke me up. I think number 23 might be my favorite. Enjoy, --John Actual Analogies and Metaphors Found in High School Essays 1. Her face was a perfect oval, like a circle that had its two sides gently compressed by a Thigh Master. 2. His thoughts tumbled in his head, making and breaking alliances like underpants in a dryer without Cling Free. 3. He spoke with the wisdom that can only come from experience, like a guy who went blind because he looked at a solar eclipse without one of those boxes with a pinhole in it and now goes around the country speaking at high schools about the dangers of looking at a solar eclipse without one of those boxes with a pinhole in it. 4. She grew on him like she was a colony of E. coli and he was room-temperature Canadian beef. 5. She had a deep, throaty, genuine laugh, like that sound a dog makes just before it throws up. 6. Her vocabulary was as bad as, like, whatever. 7. He was as tall as a 6'3" tree. 8. The revelation that his marriage of 30 years had disintegrated because of his wife's infidelity came as a rude shock, like a surcharge at a formerly surcharge-free ATM. 9. The little boat gently drifted across the pond exactly the way a bowling ball wouldn't. 10. McBride fell 12 stories, hitting the pavement like a Hefty bag filled with vegetable soup. 11. From the attic came an unearthly howl. The whole scene had an eerie, surreal quality, like when you're on vacation in another city and Jeopardy comes on at 7:00 p.m. instead of 7:30. 12. Her hair glistened in the rain like a nose hair after a sneeze. 13. The hailstones leaped from the pavement, just like maggots when you fry them in hot grease. 14. Long separated by cruel fate, the star-crossed lovers raced across the grassy field toward each other like two freight trains, one having left Cleveland at 6:36 p.m. traveling at 55 mph, the other from Topeka at 4:19 p.m. at a speed of 35 mph. 15. They lived in a typical suburban neighborhood with picket fences that resembled Nancy Kerrigan's teeth. 16. John and Mary had never met. They were like two hummingbirds who had also never met. 17. He fell for her like his heart was a mob informant and she was the East River. 18. Even in his last years, Grandpappy had a mind like a steel trap, only one that had been left out so long, it had rusted shut. 19. Shots rang out, as shots are wont to do. 20. The plan was simple, like my brother-in-law Phil. But unlike Phil, this plan just might work. 21. The young fighter had a hungry look, the kind you get from not eating for a while. 22. "Oh, Jason, take me!" she panted, her breasts heaving like a college freshman on $1-a-beer night. 23. He was as lame as a duck. Not the metaphorical lame duck, either, but a real duck that was actually lame. Maybe from stepping on a land mine or something. 24. The ballerina rose gracefully en pointe and extended one slender leg behind her, like a dog at a fire hydrant. 25. It was an American tradition, like fathers chasing kids around with power tools. 26. He was deeply in love. When she spoke, he thought he heard bells, as if she were a garbage truck backing up. 27. She was as easy as the TV Guide crossword. 28. Her eyes were like limpid pools, only they had forgotten to put in any pH cleanser. 29. She walked into my office like a centipede with 98 missing legs. 30. It hurt the way your tongue hurts after you accidentally staple it to the wall. --part1_7d.48f8f281.2d83e204_boundary Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Don't know why, but some of these br= oke me up.

I think number 23 might be my favorite.

Enjoy,

--John



Actual Analogies and Metaphors Found in High School Essays


1. Her face was a perfect oval, like a circle that had its two sides
gently compressed by a Thigh Master.

2. His thoughts tumbled in his head, making and breaking alliances like
underpants in a dryer without Cling Free.

3. He spoke with the wisdom that can only come from experience, like a
guy who went blind because he looked at a solar eclipse without one of
those boxes with a pinhole in it and now goes around the country
speaking at high schools about the dangers of looking at a solar
eclipse without one of those boxes with a pinhole in it.

4. She grew on him like she was a colony of E. coli and he was
room-temperature Canadian beef.

5. She had a deep, throaty, genuine laugh, like that sound a dog makes
just before it throws up.

6. Her vocabulary was as bad as, like, whatever.

7. He was as tall as a 6'3" tree.

8. The revelation that his marriage of 30 years had disintegrated
because of his wife's infidelity came as a rude shock, like a surcharge=20= at
a formerly surcharge-free ATM.

9. The little boat gently drifted across the pond exactly the way a
bowling ball wouldn't.

10. McBride fell 12 stories, hitting the pavement like a Hefty bag
filled with vegetable soup.

11. From the attic came an unearthly howl. The whole scene had an
eerie, surreal quality, like when you're on vacation in another city and
Jeopardy comes on at 7:00 p.m. instead of 7:30.

12. Her hair glistened in the rain like a nose hair after a sneeze.

13. The hailstones leaped from the pavement, just like maggots when you
fry them in hot grease.

14. Long separated by cruel fate, the star-crossed lovers raced across
the grassy field toward each other like two freight trains, one having
left Cleveland at 6:36 p.m. traveling at 55 mph, the other from Topeka a= t
4:19 p.m. at a speed of 35 mph.

15. They lived in a typical suburban neighborhood with picket fences
that resembled Nancy Kerrigan's teeth.

16. John and Mary had never met. They were like two hummingbirds who
had also never met.

17. He fell for her like his heart was a mob informant and she was the
East River.

18. Even in his last years, Grandpappy had a mind like a steel trap,
only one that had been left out so long, it had rusted shut.

19. Shots rang out, as shots are wont to do.

20. The plan was simple, like my brother-in-law Phil. But unlike Phil,
this plan just might work.

21. The young fighter had a hungry look, the kind you get from not
eating for a while.

22. "Oh, Jason, take me!" she panted, her breasts heaving like a
college freshman on $1-a-beer night.

23. He was as lame as a duck. Not the metaphorical lame duck, either,
but a real duck that was actually lame. Maybe from stepping on a land mi= ne
or something.

24. The ballerina rose gracefully en pointe and extended one slender
leg behind her, like a dog at a fire hydrant.

25. It was an American tradition, like fathers chasing kids around with
power tools.

26. He was deeply in love. When she spoke, he thought he heard bells,
as if she were a garbage truck backing up.

27. She was as easy as the TV Guide crossword.

28. Her eyes were like limpid pools, only they had forgotten to put in
any pH cleanser.

29. She walked into my office like a centipede with 98 missing legs.

30. It hurt the way your tongue hurts after you accidentally staple it
to the wall.



--part1_7d.48f8f281.2d83e204_boundary-- - * Unsubscribing? Mail majordomo@roughdraft.org with the message * UNSUBSCRIBE BANANAFISH From oconnort@panix.com Sat Mar 13 02:31:46 2004 Received: from localhost (localhost [[UNIX: localhost]]) by dont.panix.com (8.11.6p2-a/8.8.8/PanixLC1.7) id i2D7VkJ13363 for bananafish-outgoing; Sat, 13 Mar 2004 02:31:46 -0500 (EST) From: "Tim O'Connor" To: bananafish Subject: Re: Future Writers of America Date: Sat, 13 Mar 2004 02:30:27 -0500 Message-Id: <20040313073027.6916@mail.panix.com> In-Reply-To: <7d.48f8f281.2d83e204@aol.com> References: <7d.48f8f281.2d83e204@aol.com> X-Mailer: CTM PowerMail 4.2.1 us Carbon MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-bananafish@roughdraft.org Precedence: bulk Reply-To: bananafish@roughdraft.org On Fri, Mar 12, 2004, Omlor@aol.com said: >3. He spoke with the wisdom that can only come from experience, like a >guy who went blind because he looked at a solar eclipse without one of >those boxes with a pinhole in it and now goes around the country >speaking at high schools about the dangers of looking at a solar >eclipse without one of those boxes with a pinhole in it. If you threw in a few Caulfieldisms, this could be Holden, carrying on about old guys with pale legs and ratty bathrobes and the smell of Vicks and having a case of the grippe: Like I said, Mr. Antolini was the one who covered up old James Castle, who was the kid who jumped out the window of his dorm room. He used to be a regular guy, Mr. Antolini, until the day we took a field trip to the planetarium and they told us how there was going to be a solar eclipse that very afternoon. Old Mr. Antolini walked out of the planetarium lobby and onto the lawn like it was a very big deal, and he stared at the sun even before that crazy eclipse started. The story was that when he and Mrs. Antolini got home that night and were sitting around the living room listening to the radio, he all of a sudden went blind. It wasn't a normal kind of blind, either. It was what happens to you when you stare at the sun too long without one of those strictly flitty pinhole boxes that phony Ivy League guys always keep in their overcoat pockets. After he went blind, he didn't teach anymore, Mr. Antolini. He just traveled around the country and all, making speeches about how you shouldn't stare at the sun without protecting your eyes. No matter how much you thought about it, it was kind of depressing how he ended up so blind. When Mr. Antolini went out with Mrs. Antolini for a night on the town, she always guided him by the arm so they could stand at the bar, smoking and drinking and making witty comments, like they thought they were the Lunts. The both of them liked drinking their Martinis and all, and they just got a kick out of standing there at the bar for hours, telling stories like mad, the way it was when Mr. Antolini didn't use to be blind. You could see how much they both tried to act like Mr. Antolini wasn't really blind, but it was awful to look at him wearing those dark glasses and know he couldn't look back at you. They went around like Mr. Antolini was just a regular guy, but then he would try to sit on a stool and half the time he would miss it, and practically every time he missed his stool, he would spill his goddamn Martini all over himself. Mrs. Antolini kept a lot of napkins on the bar near her drink, but at the end of the night she usually used them all up, trying to blot Mr. Antolini's pants where the Martinis had splashed. By the time they were finished drinking, Mrs. Antolini had a big pile of crumby old soggy napkins she left for the bartender to take away, but she would leave a big tip to make up for it. When they left the bar, Mr. Antolini's pants would be soggy all over. If you didn't know any better, you would think he had been in some kind of accident, but it was just Martinis. He and Mrs. Antolini were Martini fiends. It was nice that she could act as his eyes. He joked that he acted as her ears, and that it made them even. He tried to make people laugh about it, but if you really listened to him, you could hear the sadness in his voice, like he was remembering what it used to be like when he could still see. --tim - * Unsubscribing? Mail majordomo@roughdraft.org with the message * UNSUBSCRIBE BANANAFISH From oconnort@panix.com Sat Mar 13 10:06:29 2004 Received: by dont.panix.com (8.11.6p2-a/8.8.8/PanixLC1.7) id i2DF6TG00172 for bananafish-outgoing; Sat, 13 Mar 2004 10:06:29 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <4052DD66.10409@drew.edu> Date: Sat, 13 Mar 2004 05:07:34 -0500 From: James Rovira User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.4) Gecko/20030624 Netscape/7.1 (ax) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: bananafish@roughdraft.org Subject: Re: Future Writers of America References: <7d.48f8f281.2d83e204@aol.com> <20040313073027.6916@mail.panix.com> In-Reply-To: <20040313073027.6916@mail.panix.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-bananafish@roughdraft.org Precedence: bulk Reply-To: bananafish@roughdraft.org I've seen several of these circulated in the past as part of a contest for "worst opening line of a novel" -- probably 2-3 years ago. Anyone else see that, or is my memory failing me? Jim Tim O'Connor wrote: >On Fri, Mar 12, 2004, Omlor@aol.com said: > > > >>3. He spoke with the wisdom that can only come from experience, like a >>guy who went blind because he looked at a solar eclipse without one of >>those boxes with a pinhole in it and now goes around the country >>speaking at high schools about the dangers of looking at a solar >>eclipse without one of those boxes with a pinhole in it. >> >> - * Unsubscribing? Mail majordomo@roughdraft.org with the message * UNSUBSCRIBE BANANAFISH From oconnort@panix.com Sat Mar 13 10:06:28 2004 Received: from localhost (localhost [[UNIX: localhost]]) by dont.panix.com (8.11.6p2-a/8.8.8/PanixLC1.7) id i2DF6Sm00167 for bananafish-outgoing; Sat, 13 Mar 2004 10:06:28 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <4052DCBF.5040006@drew.edu> Date: Sat, 13 Mar 2004 05:04:47 -0500 From: James Rovira User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.4) Gecko/20030624 Netscape/7.1 (ax) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: bananafish@roughdraft.org Subject: Re: ((((())))) References: <20040313025927.40934.qmail@web40112.mail.yahoo.com> In-Reply-To: <20040313025927.40934.qmail@web40112.mail.yahoo.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Sender: owner-bananafish@roughdraft.org Precedence: bulk Reply-To: bananafish@roughdraft.org Thanks for responding...what is the essence? Jim ana buneta wrote: > > But I’m not going to compare them. (sorry Jim. You >know, what is still there is the essence, even in croatian :)) > > > > > - * Unsubscribing? Mail majordomo@roughdraft.org with the message * UNSUBSCRIBE BANANAFISH From oconnort@panix.com Mon Mar 15 17:37:57 2004 Received: by dont.panix.com (8.11.6p2-a/8.8.8/PanixLC1.7) id i2FMbv824046 for bananafish-outgoing; Mon, 15 Mar 2004 17:37:57 -0500 (EST) From: ana To: Subject: Re: ((((())))) Date: Mon, 15 Mar 2004 11:16:19 -1100 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-2 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <20040315221619.FXYG25650.fepkx2@[212.91.98.74]> Sender: owner-bananafish@roughdraft.org Precedence: bulk Reply-To: bananafish@roughdraft.org I'll tel you as soon as I find out. I promise! :) just give me some time. ab ><><>< ----- Original Message ----- From: James Rovira To: Sent: Saturday, March 13, 2004 11:04 AM Subject: Re: ((((())))) Thanks for responding...what is the essence? Jim - * Unsubscribing? Mail majordomo@roughdraft.org with the message * UNSUBSCRIBE BANANAFISH From oconnort@panix.com Mon Mar 15 17:37:54 2004 Received: by dont.panix.com (8.11.6p2-a/8.8.8/PanixLC1.7) id i2FMbsi24021 for bananafish-outgoing; Mon, 15 Mar 2004 17:37:54 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <20040315044937.41546.qmail@web14010.mail.yahoo.com> Date: Sun, 14 Mar 2004 20:49:37 -0800 (PST) From: Cecilia Baader Subject: Re: bananafish-digest V1 #1023 To: bananafish@roughdraft.org In-Reply-To: <20040312083452.43404.qmail@web25008.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Sender: owner-bananafish@roughdraft.org Precedence: bulk Reply-To: bananafish@roughdraft.org --- Lucy Pearson wrote: > You are not the only female on the list, there are quite a few, but we > all seem to have been lurking lately. A shame, really, some of the best > posters are staying quiet at the moment (where are you Cecilia?). I'm still around; I'm just in that insanely-busy category right now. I've just agreed to adjunct at a local community college, which eats up all my spare moments. (It's a lot less glamorous than it sounds. Oh, wait. Does that sound glamorous at all?) And then I still teach high school English full time. When is summer again? I would also like to extend my heartfelt welcome. As more than one person has mentioned, we still like to discuss Salinger. But then we like to discuss other things, too. Sometimes we even find ourselves more interesting than anything else. When that happens, you just have to ask an intelligent question or two. Don't be annoyed if your first question garners little response; many of us have been around here for a while and have already posted our opinions (ad infinitum) on the various recycled subjects. The archives are a perfectly lovely place to go wading on a Spring day. Pay no attention to that nibbling on your little toe. Best, Cecilia. __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail - More reliable, more storage, less spam http://mail.yahoo.com - * Unsubscribing? Mail majordomo@roughdraft.org with the message * UNSUBSCRIBE BANANAFISH From oconnort@panix.com Mon Mar 15 17:37:56 2004 Received: from localhost (localhost [[UNIX: localhost]]) by dont.panix.com (8.11.6p2-a/8.8.8/PanixLC1.7) id i2FMbuq24036 for bananafish-outgoing; Mon, 15 Mar 2004 17:37:56 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <200403151606.i2FG6lct025845@theseus.peterson.af.mil> From: Yocum Daniel R Civ 21 CES/CEOE To: "'bananafish@roughdraft.org'" Subject: RE: Sad news Date: Mon, 15 Mar 2004 16:06:43 -0000 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2657.72) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Sender: owner-bananafish@roughdraft.org Precedence: bulk Reply-To: bananafish@roughdraft.org John O. writes "I understand now.", I nearly choked to death on my morning beverage when I read that. Each of the three words so full of meaning like a 10 year Alcoholics Anonymous member on the morning before his slip into an endless drunk. How many drinks is a 10 year chip worth bartender? Daniel my bad. jehovah's witnesses caught me goin' out the door that day. but i'm all better now. we're all going straight to hell. -mike >>> Omlor@aol.com 03/11/04 05:48PM >>> Mike explains, "...but there's a better place that we will like better." Ah, so it's only that again. I understand now. Thanks, --John - * Unsubscribing? Mail majordomo@roughdraft.org with the message * UNSUBSCRIBE BANANAFISH - * Unsubscribing? Mail majordomo@roughdraft.org with the message * UNSUBSCRIBE BANANAFISH From oconnort@panix.com Mon Mar 15 17:37:55 2004 Received: by dont.panix.com (8.11.6p2-a/8.8.8/PanixLC1.7) id i2FMbtB24030 for bananafish-outgoing; Mon, 15 Mar 2004 17:37:55 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <200403151559.i2FFxBMo019785@theseus.peterson.af.mil> From: Yocum Daniel R Civ 21 CES/CEOE To: "'bananafish@roughdraft.org'" Subject: RE: ((((())))) Date: Mon, 15 Mar 2004 15:59:07 -0000 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2657.72) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Sender: owner-bananafish@roughdraft.org Precedence: bulk Reply-To: bananafish@roughdraft.org Write, think of all the outrageous conversations as if you were sitting in his room at Magdalen College, and write. Daniel Me too! I especially like the Screwtape Letters. Although... I'm usually too shy to write anything on here... ~Anne - * Unsubscribing? Mail majordomo@roughdraft.org with the message * UNSUBSCRIBE BANANAFISH From oconnort@panix.com Mon Mar 15 17:37:54 2004 Received: from localhost (localhost [[UNIX: localhost]]) by dont.panix.com (8.11.6p2-a/8.8.8/PanixLC1.7) id i2FMbsL24014 for bananafish-outgoing; Mon, 15 Mar 2004 17:37:54 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <20040314181322.82982.qmail@web10308.mail.yahoo.com> Date: Sun, 14 Mar 2004 13:13:22 -0500 (EST) From: Anne "Thériault" Subject: RE: ((((())))) To: bananafish@roughdraft.org In-Reply-To: <4051E09C.ADC2.3713.000*/c=us/admd=/prmd=or.gov/o=HR/ou=gwise/s=Anello/g=Michael/i=J/@MHS> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Sender: owner-bananafish@roughdraft.org Precedence: bulk Reply-To: bananafish@roughdraft.org Hi, The Screwtape letters is one of Lewis' religious oriented books... it consists of one high-ranking devil, Screwtape (an assistant to "Our Father Below", as they call him) writing letters of encouragement to his nephew, Wormwood, a kind of beginner-devil who is trying to turn a man's soul away from God. It's both rather funny and at the same time the ideas behind it are a bit frightening. I'm probably not doing it justice in this description, but I really enjoyed the book... everyone should definitely read it, even if they're not religious. I'm not really, and I still liked it very much. ~Anne --- ANELLO Michael J wrote: > anne, what are the screwtape letters about? i've > never read them and i prefer > shy people to fill me in. they always only tell me > the right stuff. > > -mike > > >>> ruby_twitch@yahoo.com 03/11/04 09:00PM >>> > Me too! I especially like the Screwtape Letters. > Although... I'm usually too shy to write anything on > here... > ~Anne > > --- Yocum Daniel R Civ 21 CES/CEOE > wrote: > Ana, I'm a > C.S. Lewis fan also. > > Daniel > > > > > > > > > > That's all for now. > > ab > > ><><>< > > > > > > ===== > > IF YOU LOOK FOR TRUTH, YOU MAY FIND COMFORT IN THE > > END; > > IF YOU LOOK FOR COMFORT, YOU WILL NOT GET EITHER > > COMFORT OR TRUTH- > > ONLY SOFTSOAP AND WISHFUL THINKING TO BEGIN WITH > > AND, IN THE END, DESPAIR. > > (C.S.Lewis) > > - > > * Unsubscribing? Mail majordomo@roughdraft.org > with > > the message > > * UNSUBSCRIBE BANANAFISH > > ______________________________________________________________________ > > Post your free ad now! http://personals.yahoo.ca > - > * Unsubscribing? Mail majordomo@roughdraft.org with > the message > * UNSUBSCRIBE BANANAFISH > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > - > * Unsubscribing? Mail majordomo@roughdraft.org with > the message > * UNSUBSCRIBE BANANAFISH ______________________________________________________________________ Post your free ad now! http://personals.yahoo.ca - * Unsubscribing? Mail majordomo@roughdraft.org with the message * UNSUBSCRIBE BANANAFISH From oconnort@panix.com Mon Mar 15 19:22:11 2004 Received: from localhost (localhost [[UNIX: localhost]]) by dont.panix.com (8.11.6p2-a/8.8.8/PanixLC1.7) id i2G0MB228883 for bananafish-outgoing; Mon, 15 Mar 2004 19:22:11 -0500 (EST) From: Omlor@aol.com Message-ID: Date: Mon, 15 Mar 2004 18:24:40 EST Subject: Re: Sad news To: bananafish@roughdraft.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="part1_d5.7a15000.2d879538_boundary" X-Mailer: 6.0 sub 10581 Sender: owner-bananafish@roughdraft.org Precedence: bulk Reply-To: bananafish@roughdraft.org --part1_d5.7a15000.2d879538_boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Daniel, I saw my name in one of your posts. Huh? --John --part1_d5.7a15000.2d879538_boundary Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Daniel,

I saw my name in one of your posts.

Huh?

--John --part1_d5.7a15000.2d879538_boundary-- - * Unsubscribing? Mail majordomo@roughdraft.org with the message * UNSUBSCRIBE BANANAFISH From oconnort@panix.com Tue Mar 16 08:04:54 2004 Received: by dont.panix.com (8.11.6p2-a/8.8.8/PanixLC1.7) id i2GD4sf01089 for bananafish-outgoing; Tue, 16 Mar 2004 08:04:54 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <20040316015516.73215.qmail@web14006.mail.yahoo.com> Date: Mon, 15 Mar 2004 17:55:16 -0800 (PST) From: Cecilia Baader Subject: SmokeLong Quarterly To: bananafish@roughdraft.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Sender: owner-bananafish@roughdraft.org Precedence: bulk Reply-To: bananafish@roughdraft.org A friend of mine had a story in this issue, and I noticed the following: http://smokelong.com/flash.asp?id=543 Thought one or two of you might be interested. I'll save my comments until later. Best, Cecilia. __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail - More reliable, more storage, less spam http://mail.yahoo.com - * Unsubscribing? Mail majordomo@roughdraft.org with the message * UNSUBSCRIBE BANANAFISH From oconnort@panix.com Tue Mar 16 08:04:54 2004 Received: from localhost (localhost [[UNIX: localhost]]) by dont.panix.com (8.11.6p2-a/8.8.8/PanixLC1.7) id i2GD4sL01084 for bananafish-outgoing; Tue, 16 Mar 2004 08:04:54 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <405654C8.9030306@drew.edu> Date: Mon, 15 Mar 2004 20:13:44 -0500 From: James Rovira User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.4) Gecko/20030624 Netscape/7.1 (ax) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: bananafish@roughdraft.org Subject: Re: bananafish-digest V1 #1023 References: <20040315044937.41546.qmail@web14010.mail.yahoo.com> In-Reply-To: <20040315044937.41546.qmail@web14010.mail.yahoo.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-bananafish@roughdraft.org Precedence: bulk Reply-To: bananafish@roughdraft.org Cecilia: Good lord. You teach HS full time AND adjunct at a community college. Yep, no spare time at all. More power to you... Ana: Ha! If you don't know what it is, how are you sure it comes through in Croatian? :) Let me suggest a few things that may fill in for the essence of Catcher. I would say plot definitely comes through. I would say the fact that Holden is an idealistic, intelligent, somewhat disturbed teenager comes through. I would say the fact that Holden thinks most of the world is somewhat hypocritical or phony comes through. I would say some of the things that are important to Holden -- self effacement, especially while doing something you love, honesty, and consideration -- those all come through. I'm not sure that the absolute uniqueness of Holden's voice comes through. I'm not sure that what this communicates about Holden as a specific young person wandering around NYC comes through -- all the little cultural signifiers that are carried along with his choice of, and arrangement of, words. What do you think? I figure you've read it in both Croatian and English, so you'd be better qualified than I to say. I think it's better to talk about what specifically comes through and what doesn't, though, than to worry about essence. John -- I think Daniel is responding to the post-structuralist stuff, thinking that it's inconsistent for you to say you understand him given what he perceives as your ideas about language. Jim Cecilia Baader wrote: > I'm still around; I'm just in that insanely-busy category right now. I've > >just agreed to adjunct at a local community college, which eats up all my >spare moments. (It's a lot less glamorous than it sounds. Oh, wait. >Does that sound glamorous at all?) And then I still teach high school >English full time. > > > - * Unsubscribing? Mail majordomo@roughdraft.org with the message * UNSUBSCRIBE BANANAFISH From oconnort@panix.com Tue Mar 16 11:57:21 2004 Received: from localhost (localhost [[UNIX: localhost]]) by dont.panix.com (8.11.6p2-a/8.8.8/PanixLC1.7) id i2GGvLj14249 for bananafish-outgoing; Tue, 16 Mar 2004 11:57:21 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <40571167.1090608@drew.edu> Date: Tue, 16 Mar 2004 09:38:31 -0500 From: James Rovira User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.3) Gecko/20030312 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en, de, de-at, de-de, fr-fr, es-pr MIME-Version: 1.0 To: bananafish@roughdraft.org Subject: Re: SmokeLong Quarterly References: <20040316015516.73215.qmail@web14006.mail.yahoo.com> In-Reply-To: <20040316015516.73215.qmail@web14006.mail.yahoo.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-bananafish@roughdraft.org Precedence: bulk Reply-To: bananafish@roughdraft.org Ha :). Great commentary on Salinger. Jim Cecilia Baader wrote: >A friend of mine had a story in this issue, and I noticed the following: > >http://smokelong.com/flash.asp?id=543 > >Thought one or two of you might be interested. I'll save my comments >until later. > >Best, >Cecilia. > > - * Unsubscribing? Mail majordomo@roughdraft.org with the message * UNSUBSCRIBE BANANAFISH From oconnort@panix.com Tue Mar 16 11:57:21 2004 Received: by dont.panix.com (8.11.6p2-a/8.8.8/PanixLC1.7) id i2GGvLr14254 for bananafish-outgoing; Tue, 16 Mar 2004 11:57:21 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <20040316162518.29365.qmail@web10306.mail.yahoo.com> Date: Tue, 16 Mar 2004 11:25:18 -0500 (EST) From: Anne "Thériault" Subject: RE: ((((())))) To: bananafish@roughdraft.org In-Reply-To: <200403151559.i2FFxBMo019785@theseus.peterson.af.mil> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Sender: owner-bananafish@roughdraft.org Precedence: bulk Reply-To: bananafish@roughdraft.org I did write something explaining the Screwtape Letters a few days ago, and I've been waiting for it to come through, but is hasn't. Does that happen sometimes? I can write another if you like. --- Yocum Daniel R Civ 21 CES/CEOE wrote: > Write, think of all the outrageous conversations as > if you were sitting in > his room at Magdalen College, and write. > Daniel > > Me too! I especially like the Screwtape Letters. > Although... I'm usually too shy to write anything on > here... > ~Anne > - > * Unsubscribing? Mail majordomo@roughdraft.org with > the message > * UNSUBSCRIBE BANANAFISH ______________________________________________________________________ Post your free ad now! http://personals.yahoo.ca - * Unsubscribing? Mail majordomo@roughdraft.org with the message * UNSUBSCRIBE BANANAFISH From oconnort@panix.com Tue Mar 16 12:05:45 2004 Received: from localhost (localhost [[UNIX: localhost]]) by dont.panix.com (8.11.6p2-a/8.8.8/PanixLC1.7) id i2GH5ju14733 for bananafish-outgoing; Tue, 16 Mar 2004 12:05:45 -0500 (EST) Date: Tue, 16 Mar 2004 12:03:43 -0500 From: "Tim O'Connor" To: bananafish@roughdraft.org Subject: Re: ((((())))) Message-ID: <20040316170343.GA20631@panix.com> References: <200403151559.i2FFxBMo019785@theseus.peterson.af.mil> <20040316162518.29365.qmail@web10306.mail.yahoo.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: <20040316162518.29365.qmail@web10306.mail.yahoo.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.1i Sender: owner-bananafish@roughdraft.org Precedence: bulk Reply-To: bananafish@roughdraft.org On Tue, Mar 16, 2004 at 11:25:18AM -0500, Anne Thériault wrote: > I did write something explaining the Screwtape Letters > a few days ago, and I've been waiting for it to come > through, but is hasn't. Does that happen sometimes? I > can write another if you like. No, that does not happen often, if ever. I manually process all submissions to be sure there are no infections. (We still get a few each day.) Are you referring to mail you sent Sunday that said this? > Hi, > The Screwtape letters is one of Lewis' religious > oriented books... it consists of one high-ranking > devil, Screwtape (an assistant to "Our Father Below", > as they call him) writing letters of encouragement to > his nephew, Wormwood, a kind of beginner-devil who is > trying to turn a man's soul away from God. > It's both rather funny and at the same time the ideas > behind it are a bit frightening. I'm probably not > doing it justice in this description, but I really > enjoyed the book... everyone should definitely read > it, even if they're not religious. I'm not really, and > I still liked it very much. If you didn't get it, that makes me wonder about what is happening on your end. (I didn't get a bounce back from your mailbox.) The only thing I recall in recent memory is that Scottie sent something that never showed up. I replicate the mailbox for this list in three independent places, so if there's a disaster somewhere I have a fallback plan. I checked two of the three (the third is firewalled off and I cannot reach it from where I am now), and this mail from you is the most recent. Please let me know if there's another message at large. 8-) --tim o'connor - * Unsubscribing? Mail majordomo@roughdraft.org with the message * UNSUBSCRIBE BANANAFISH From oconnort@panix.com Tue Mar 16 21:30:57 2004 Received: from localhost (localhost [[UNIX: localhost]]) by dont.panix.com (8.11.6p2-a/8.8.8/PanixLC1.7) id i2H2Uvh13202 for bananafish-outgoing; Tue, 16 Mar 2004 21:30:57 -0500 (EST) X400-Received: by mta Salem-MTA1 in /c=US/admd= /prmd=or.gov/; Relayed; 16 Mar 2004 09:42:04 -0800 X400-Received: by /c=US/admd= /prmd=or.gov/; Relayed; 16 Mar 2004 09:42:04 -0800 X400-MTS-Identifier: [/c=US/admd= /prmd=or.gov/; 40573C62.ADC2.25D7.000] Content-Identifier: 0623240573C6C009 Content-Return: Allowed X400-Content-Type: P2-1988 ( 22 ) Conversion: Allowed Original-Encoded-Information-Types: IA5-Text Disclose-Recipients: Prohibited Alternate-Recipient: Allowed X400-Originator: Michael.J.Anello@state.or.us X400-Recipients: non-disclosure; Message-Id: <40573C62.ADC2.25D7.000*/c=us/admd=/prmd=or.gov/o=HR/ou=gwise/s=Anello/g=Michael/i=J/@MHS> Date: 16 Mar 2004 09:42:04 -0800 From: ANELLO Michael J To: bananafish@roughdraft.org, jrovira@drew.edu Subject: Re: SmokeLong Quarterly Sender: owner-bananafish@roughdraft.org Precedence: bulk Reply-To: bananafish@roughdraft.org jim, everytime you go "ha", i can hear alf. -mike >>> jrovira@drew.edu 03/16/04 09:00AM >>> Ha :). Great commentary on Salinger. Jim Cecilia Baader wrote: >A friend of mine had a story in this issue, and I noticed the following: > >http://smokelong.com/flash.asp?id=543 > >Thought one or two of you might be interested. I'll save my comments >until later. > >Best, >Cecilia. > > - * Unsubscribing? Mail majordomo@roughdraft.org with the message * UNSUBSCRIBE BANANAFISH - * Unsubscribing? Mail majordomo@roughdraft.org with the message * UNSUBSCRIBE BANANAFISH From oconnort@panix.com Tue Mar 16 21:30:57 2004 Received: from localhost (localhost [[UNIX: localhost]]) by dont.panix.com (8.11.6p2-a/8.8.8/PanixLC1.7) id i2H2Uvg13206 for bananafish-outgoing; Tue, 16 Mar 2004 21:30:57 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <4057362C.2060604@drew.edu> Date: Tue, 16 Mar 2004 12:15:24 -0500 From: James Rovira User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.3) Gecko/20030312 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en, de, de-at, de-de, fr-fr, es-pr MIME-Version: 1.0 To: bananafish@roughdraft.org Subject: Re: ((((())))) References: <200403151559.i2FFxBMo019785@theseus.peterson.af.mil> <20040316162518.29365.qmail@web10306.mail.yahoo.com> <20040316170343.GA20631@panix.com> In-Reply-To: <20040316170343.GA20631@panix.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Sender: owner-bananafish@roughdraft.org Precedence: bulk Reply-To: bananafish@roughdraft.org I received Anne's e-mail about the Screwtape letters from the b-fish list earlier today. Jim Tim O'Connor wrote: >On Tue, Mar 16, 2004 at 11:25:18AM -0500, Anne Thériault wrote: > > > >>I did write something explaining the Screwtape Letters >>a few days ago, and I've been waiting for it to come >>through, but is hasn't. Does that happen sometimes? I >>can write another if you like. >> >> > > > > > - * Unsubscribing? Mail majordomo@roughdraft.org with the message * UNSUBSCRIBE BANANAFISH From oconnort@panix.com Tue Mar 16 21:30:57 2004 Received: by dont.panix.com (8.11.6p2-a/8.8.8/PanixLC1.7) id i2H2Uvh13213 for bananafish-outgoing; Tue, 16 Mar 2004 21:30:57 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <20040316191929.97039.qmail@web10309.mail.yahoo.com> Date: Tue, 16 Mar 2004 14:19:29 -0500 (EST) From: Anne "Thériault" Subject: Re: ((((())))) To: bananafish@roughdraft.org In-Reply-To: <20040316170343.GA20631@panix.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Sender: owner-bananafish@roughdraft.org Precedence: bulk Reply-To: bananafish@roughdraft.org Of course, the thing that I wrote about Screwtape showed up in my mailbox about 3 seconds after I sent off that last e-mail... sorry! I must be my e-mail that's slow. ~Anne --- Tim O'Connor wrote: > On Tue, Mar 16, 2004 at 11:25:18AM -0500, Anne > Thériault wrote: > > > I did write something explaining the Screwtape > Letters > > a few days ago, and I've been waiting for it to > come > > through, but is hasn't. Does that happen > sometimes? I > > can write another if you like. > > No, that does not happen often, if ever. I manually > process all > submissions to be sure there are no infections. (We > still get a few > each day.) > > Are you referring to mail you sent Sunday that said > this? > > > Hi, > > The Screwtape letters is one of Lewis' religious > > oriented books... it consists of one high-ranking > > devil, Screwtape (an assistant to "Our Father > Below", > > as they call him) writing letters of encouragement > to > > his nephew, Wormwood, a kind of beginner-devil who > is > > trying to turn a man's soul away from God. > > It's both rather funny and at the same time the > ideas > > behind it are a bit frightening. I'm probably not > > > doing it justice in this description, but I really > > > enjoyed the book... everyone should definitely > read > > it, even if they're not religious. I'm not really, > and > > I still liked it very much. > > If you didn't get it, that makes me wonder about > what is happening on > your end. (I didn't get a bounce back from your > mailbox.) > > The only thing I recall in recent memory is that > Scottie sent something > that never showed up. > > I replicate the mailbox for this list in three > independent places, so if > there's a disaster somewhere I have a fallback plan. > I checked two of > the three (the third is firewalled off and I cannot > reach it from where > I am now), and this mail from you is the most > recent. > > Please let me know if there's another message at > large. 8-) > > --tim o'connor > > - > * Unsubscribing? Mail majordomo@roughdraft.org with > the message > * UNSUBSCRIBE BANANAFISH ______________________________________________________________________ Post your free ad now! http://personals.yahoo.ca - * Unsubscribing? Mail majordomo@roughdraft.org with the message * UNSUBSCRIBE BANANAFISH From oconnort@panix.com Tue Mar 16 21:30:58 2004 Received: by dont.panix.com (8.11.6p2-a/8.8.8/PanixLC1.7) id i2H2Uwu13214 for bananafish-outgoing; Tue, 16 Mar 2004 21:30:58 -0500 (EST) X-Originating-IP: [199.104.18.231] X-Originating-Email: [ralanya@hotmail.com] X-Sender: ralanya@hotmail.com From: "Robin Dudley" To: bananafish@roughdraft.org Subject: RE: SmokeLong Quarterly Date: Tue, 16 Mar 2004 20:54:09 +0000 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed Message-ID: X-OriginalArrivalTime: 16 Mar 2004 20:54:11.0355 (UTC) FILETIME=[D53AC6B0:01C40B98] Sender: owner-bananafish@roughdraft.org Precedence: bulk Reply-To: bananafish@roughdraft.org Yes, yes, yes. I enjoyed this; thank you. >From: Cecilia Baader >Reply-To: bananafish@roughdraft.org >To: bananafish@roughdraft.org >Subject: SmokeLong Quarterly >Date: Mon, 15 Mar 2004 17:55:16 -0800 (PST) > > >A friend of mine had a story in this issue, and I noticed the following: > >http://smokelong.com/flash.asp?id=543 > >Thought one or two of you might be interested. I'll save my comments >until later. > >Best, >Cecilia. > > > >__________________________________ >Do you Yahoo!? >Yahoo! Mail - More reliable, more storage, less spam >http://mail.yahoo.com >- >* Unsubscribing? Mail majordomo@roughdraft.org with the message >* UNSUBSCRIBE BANANAFISH _________________________________________________________________ Is your PC infected? Get a FREE online computer virus scan from McAfee® Security. http://clinic.mcafee.com/clinic/ibuy/campaign.asp?cid=3963 - * Unsubscribing? Mail majordomo@roughdraft.org with the message * UNSUBSCRIBE BANANAFISH From oconnort@panix.com Tue Mar 16 22:23:46 2004 Received: from localhost (localhost [[UNIX: localhost]]) by dont.panix.com (8.11.6p2-a/8.8.8/PanixLC1.7) id i2H3Nkj15964 for bananafish-outgoing; Tue, 16 Mar 2004 22:23:46 -0500 (EST) From: "Tim O'Connor" To: bananafish Subject: Re: ((((())))) Date: Tue, 16 Mar 2004 21:51:09 -0500 Message-Id: <20040317025109.27976@mail.panix.com> In-Reply-To: <20040316191929.97039.qmail@web10309.mail.yahoo.com> References: <20040316191929.97039.qmail@web10309.mail.yahoo.com> X-Mailer: CTM PowerMail 4.2.1 us Carbon MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-bananafish@roughdraft.org Precedence: bulk Reply-To: bananafish@roughdraft.org On Tue, Mar 16, 2004, ruby_twitch@yahoo.com said: >Of course, the thing that I wrote about Screwtape >showed up in my mailbox about 3 seconds after I sent >off that last e-mail... sorry! I must be my e-mail >that's slow. We aim to please in this four-star accommodation. Seriously, this was not delayed on any of the accounts I own, but at least you and Jim both received copies that were 36 to 48 hours delayed (roughly). So, clearly it wasn't just you. (Or Jim.) Please tell me (send to me directly rather than to the list) if OTHER list mail came to you all in a bunch, or if it was just the one message. Jim, if you can tell me privately as well, I'd appreciate it. Especially if either of you can turn on "full mail headers" (exact method depends on the mail software you use) and send me all the lines above the mail content, that will allow me to figure out where your mail sat all that time. If you use Eudora, click on "BLAH BLAH BLAH" button. Other mailers may have a pull-down menu that says View --> Show Headers --> Full. If there is anyone else who experienced some eccentric delay, I'd appreciate getting full headers from your mailbox as well for delayed messages. Since this topic is as dry as a sun-bleached bone, I ask you to send it to me rather than to the list. If you send it to the list, even more subscribers may scurry to unsubscribe.... Thanks! --tim - * Unsubscribing? Mail majordomo@roughdraft.org with the message * UNSUBSCRIBE BANANAFISH From oconnort@panix.com Tue Mar 16 22:23:47 2004 Received: by dont.panix.com (8.11.6p2-a/8.8.8/PanixLC1.7) id i2H3Nlv15975 for bananafish-outgoing; Tue, 16 Mar 2004 22:23:47 -0500 (EST) From: "Tim O'Connor" To: bananafish Subject: Writing Mania Date: Tue, 16 Mar 2004 22:13:46 -0500 Message-Id: <20040317031346.21618@mail.panix.com> X-Mailer: CTM PowerMail 4.2.1 us Carbon MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-bananafish@roughdraft.org Precedence: bulk Reply-To: bananafish@roughdraft.org Quite a while ago, we were discussing the act of writing and the materials and other details thereof. I recall Scottie commenting (negatively) about those who write in purple or green ink. It got my attention because I usually write drafts in green ink, and of course as I recall the diagnosis, it was to some degree negative. I have never wanted to write in purple ink. Just not for me. Which leads me to my real subject, which is a book I just picked up and am reading with some interest. It is called THE MIDNIGHT DISEASE: THE DRIVE TO WRITE, WRITER'S BLOCK, AND THE CREATIVE BRAIN. In part it talks about hypergraphia (an obsessive need to write), and mentions certain high-functioning temporal lobe epileptics, including Dostoevsky, Flaubert, and Lewis Carroll. Carroll wrote exclusively with purple ink (and in his life wrote at least 98,721 letters; I don't know how, exactly, anyone came up with such a precise number); Flaubert, too, seems to have been focused on ink color, but I am sure that Lane Coutell could fill us in on the why and what and how of it all. It is a fascinating book, at least that which I have read so far. I was intrigued by the accounts of "hyperlexia," the obsessive need to READ. I went through a period of that last summer, where I read three or four books a day while taking some time out of work. I also completed final drafts on two stories, and roughly sketched out two others. I'm not aware of what might have caused it, aside from being idle and ingesting too much coffee, but the mania felt pretty good, as mania goes, for almost a week. Ah, but then I plummeted from mania to a trough as deep as the Marianas Trench. And I only had blue-black ink with me, but I survived. Hmmmm. All in all it's an intriguing book; the writer is a neurologist, Alice W. Flaherty. I should add, in a burst of candor, that I am a fan of Oliver Sacks, as well as Jerome Groopman (who is profiled in today's or tomorrow's New York Times online). If you read the New Yorker much, you will have come across Dr. Groopman's wonderful epistles. The man is truly and deeply gifted. Now back to mixing ink cocktails.... --tim - * Unsubscribing? Mail majordomo@roughdraft.org with the message * UNSUBSCRIBE BANANAFISH From oconnort@panix.com Tue Mar 16 22:23:47 2004 Received: by dont.panix.com (8.11.6p2-a/8.8.8/PanixLC1.7) id i2H3NlV15970 for bananafish-outgoing; Tue, 16 Mar 2004 22:23:47 -0500 (EST) From: "Tim O'Connor" To: bananafish Subject: Re: SmokeLong Quarterly Date: Tue, 16 Mar 2004 21:52:00 -0500 Message-Id: <20040317025200.29602@mail.panix.com> In-Reply-To: <20040316015516.73215.qmail@web14006.mail.yahoo.com> References: <20040316015516.73215.qmail@web14006.mail.yahoo.com> X-Mailer: CTM PowerMail 4.2.1 us Carbon MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-bananafish@roughdraft.org Precedence: bulk Reply-To: bananafish@roughdraft.org On Mon, Mar 15, 2004, ceciliabaader@yahoo.com said: >A friend of mine had a story in this issue, and I noticed the following: > >http://smokelong.com/flash.asp?id=543 > >Thought one or two of you might be interested. I'll save my comments >until later. I don't know what to say ... it was DISTURBING in some way. I don't think I can explain. --tim - * Unsubscribing? Mail majordomo@roughdraft.org with the message * UNSUBSCRIBE BANANAFISH From oconnort@panix.com Thu Mar 18 01:00:47 2004 Received: by dont.panix.com (8.11.6p2-a/8.8.8/PanixLC1.7) id i2I60lW14281 for bananafish-outgoing; Thu, 18 Mar 2004 01:00:47 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <200403171455.i2HEt80U028981@theseus.peterson.af.mil> From: Yocum Daniel R Civ 21 CES/CEOE To: "'bananafish@roughdraft.org'" Subject: RE: SmokeLong Quarterly Date: Wed, 17 Mar 2004 14:55:05 -0000 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2657.72) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Sender: owner-bananafish@roughdraft.org Precedence: bulk Reply-To: bananafish@roughdraft.org So, if Catcher is about Hurtgen and the war and Jerome is trying to off Holden, then does that mean that Jerome offed his egregious brothers in arms? Daniel >A friend of mine had a story in this issue, and I noticed the following: > >http://smokelong.com/flash.asp?id=543 > >Thought one or two of you might be interested. I'll save my comments >until later. I don't know what to say ... it was DISTURBING in some way. I don't think I can explain. --tim - * Unsubscribing? Mail majordomo@roughdraft.org with the message * UNSUBSCRIBE BANANAFISH From oconnort@panix.com Thu Mar 18 01:00:46 2004 Received: by dont.panix.com (8.11.6p2-a/8.8.8/PanixLC1.7) id i2I60k614268 for bananafish-outgoing; Thu, 18 Mar 2004 01:00:46 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <200403171450.i2HEorUs026019@theseus.peterson.af.mil> From: Yocum Daniel R Civ 21 CES/CEOE To: "'bananafish@roughdraft.org'" Subject: RE: Writing Mania Date: Wed, 17 Mar 2004 14:50:53 -0000 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2657.72) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Sender: owner-bananafish@roughdraft.org Precedence: bulk Reply-To: bananafish@roughdraft.org Is the book in purple or green ink? Daniel All in all it's an intriguing book; the writer is a neurologist, Alice W. Flaherty. --tim - * Unsubscribing? Mail majordomo@roughdraft.org with the message * UNSUBSCRIBE BANANAFISH From oconnort@panix.com Thu Mar 18 01:00:45 2004 Received: from localhost (localhost [[UNIX: localhost]]) by dont.panix.com (8.11.6p2-a/8.8.8/PanixLC1.7) id i2I60jn14244 for bananafish-outgoing; Thu, 18 Mar 2004 01:00:45 -0500 (EST) X400-Received: by mta Salem-MTA1 in /c=US/admd= /prmd=or.gov/; Relayed; 17 Mar 2004 08:03:46 -0800 X400-Received: by /c=US/admd= /prmd=or.gov/; Relayed; 17 Mar 2004 08:03:46 -0800 X400-MTS-Identifier: [/c=US/admd= /prmd=or.gov/; 405876D6.ADC2.1E78.000] Content-Identifier: 061B3405876E2001 Content-Return: Allowed X400-Content-Type: P2-1988 ( 22 ) Conversion: Allowed Original-Encoded-Information-Types: IA5-Text Disclose-Recipients: Prohibited Alternate-Recipient: Allowed X400-Originator: Michael.J.Anello@state.or.us X400-Recipients: non-disclosure; Message-Id: <405876D6.ADC2.1E78.000*/c=us/admd=/prmd=or.gov/o=HR/ou=gwise/s=Anello/g=Michael/i=J/@MHS> Date: 17 Mar 2004 08:03:46 -0800 From: ANELLO Michael J To: bananafish@roughdraft.org, tim@roughdraft.org Subject: Re: Writing Mania Sender: owner-bananafish@roughdraft.org Precedence: bulk Reply-To: bananafish@roughdraft.org i refuse to write in anything except white ink. there. i said it. -mike >>> tim@roughdraft.org 03/16/04 07:24PM >>> Quite a while ago, we were discussing the act of writing and the materials and other details thereof. I recall Scottie commenting (negatively) about those who write in purple or green ink. It got my attention because I usually write drafts in green ink, and of course as I recall the diagnosis, it was to some degree negative. I have never wanted to write in purple ink. Just not for me. Which leads me to my real subject, which is a book I just picked up and am reading with some interest. It is called THE MIDNIGHT DISEASE: THE DRIVE TO WRITE, WRITER'S BLOCK, AND THE CREATIVE BRAIN. In part it talks about hypergraphia (an obsessive need to write), and mentions certain high-functioning temporal lobe epileptics, including Dostoevsky, Flaubert, and Lewis Carroll. Carroll wrote exclusively with purple ink (and in his life wrote at least 98,721 letters; I don't know how, exactly, anyone came up with such a precise number); Flaubert, too, seems to have been focused on ink color, but I am sure that Lane Coutell could fill us in on the why and what and how of it all. It is a fascinating book, at least that which I have read so far. I was intrigued by the accounts of "hyperlexia," the obsessive need to READ. I went through a period of that last summer, where I read three or four books a day while taking some time out of work. I also completed final drafts on two stories, and roughly sketched out two others. I'm not aware of what might have caused it, aside from being idle and ingesting too much coffee, but the mania felt pretty good, as mania goes, for almost a week. Ah, but then I plummeted from mania to a trough as deep as the Marianas Trench. And I only had blue-black ink with me, but I survived. Hmmmm. All in all it's an intriguing book; the writer is a neurologist, Alice W. Flaherty. I should add, in a burst of candor, that I am a fan of Oliver Sacks, as well as Jerome Groopman (who is profiled in today's or tomorrow's New York Times online). If you read the New Yorker much, you will have come across Dr. Groopman's wonderful epistles. The man is truly and deeply gifted. Now back to mixing ink cocktails.... --tim - * Unsubscribing? Mail majordomo@roughdraft.org with the message * UNSUBSCRIBE BANANAFISH - * Unsubscribing? Mail majordomo@roughdraft.org with the message * UNSUBSCRIBE BANANAFISH From oconnort@panix.com Thu Mar 18 01:00:47 2004 Received: by dont.panix.com (8.11.6p2-a/8.8.8/PanixLC1.7) id i2I60ls14275 for bananafish-outgoing; Thu, 18 Mar 2004 01:00:47 -0500 (EST) X400-Received: by mta Salem-MTA1 in /c=US/admd= /prmd=or.gov/; Relayed; 17 Mar 2004 10:15:51 -0800 X400-Received: by /c=US/admd= /prmd=or.gov/; Relayed; 17 Mar 2004 10:15:51 -0800 X400-MTS-Identifier: [/c=US/admd= /prmd=or.gov/; 405895C7.ADC2.38FD.000] Content-Identifier: 01BC1405895D7004 Content-Return: Allowed X400-Content-Type: P2-1988 ( 22 ) Conversion: Allowed Original-Encoded-Information-Types: IA5-Text Disclose-Recipients: Prohibited Alternate-Recipient: Allowed X400-Originator: Michael.J.Anello@state.or.us X400-Recipients: non-disclosure; Message-Id: <405895C7.ADC2.38FD.000*/c=us/admd=/prmd=or.gov/o=HR/ou=gwise/s=Anello/g=Michael/i=J/@MHS> Date: 17 Mar 2004 10:15:51 -0800 From: ANELLO Michael J To: bananafish@roughdraft.org Subject: Salinger.org works again... Sender: owner-bananafish@roughdraft.org Precedence: bulk Reply-To: bananafish@roughdraft.org What does anyone think about the "Young Folks Mystery?" http://www.salinger.org/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=31 - * Unsubscribing? Mail majordomo@roughdraft.org with the message * UNSUBSCRIBE BANANAFISH From oconnort@panix.com Thu Mar 18 01:00:47 2004 Received: by dont.panix.com (8.11.6p2-a/8.8.8/PanixLC1.7) id i2I60li14286 for bananafish-outgoing; Thu, 18 Mar 2004 01:00:47 -0500 (EST) From: ana To: Subject: Re: bananafish-digest V1 #1023 Date: Wed, 17 Mar 2004 12:53:06 -1100 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-2 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <20040317235306.HNVH25650.fepkx2@[212.91.98.73]> Sender: owner-bananafish@roughdraft.org Precedence: bulk Reply-To: bananafish@roughdraft.org grrrrrrrrrr :) it’s (woman) intuition :))) At first I wrote ‘you know the essence is still there (somewhere :)), even in croatian :))’ :) I agree with you, specially about the ‘all the little cultural signifiers that are carried along with his choice of, and arrangement of, words.’ Yeap. I’m aware of that. That just can’t be translated, and even if I read it in original I still don’t get all of it as you can. I’m not thinking that much about the Catcher (more about Seymour and Franny), but there is one thing I hate about our translation, specially serbian - declination of name Phoebe. I can’t read that. Most of the names can be declined but not this name. It’s so awful. And this sort of things. It’s nothing with nacionalism (some of their solutions in grammar I prefer more than in croatian), but even some croatian translation use some serbian words (maybe/probably because it was still serbo-croatian language) that just don’t fit. Or maybe it is mine perception of certain words that sound more rural (because they are serbian?) and don’t get along with Holden’s language. Words that even some young man wondering around Zagreb certainly wouldn’t use. The question is: would it be used in Belgrade? I don’t think so. So, for me, some words that are chosen for our translation wouldn’t even fit in character, in Holden as young person. And the rest of it... But you know, we are fortunate to have movies with subtitles (not synchronized), and I believe we gain a lot from it, just listening. We are picking it out very much. Please, don’t judge everything I write on my example. :)) I think I’ll stop now, before somebody starts yelling 'Digression!' :) Now I’m sorry that I mentioned translation at first place :) What I wanted to say is that I’m more interested in what’s important in the story than in translation. and I really don’t understand what do you really want to know? I mean, why are you interested in croatian translation :) I guess I would enjoy discussing it with some Serb, Croat, etc. but what it means to some usa guy? Anything else Nope. Ana ><><>< ...to respect all individualities in their folly of the moment, whether serious, fearful, timid, ardent, vigorous, decided or enthusiastic; to strip one's church of every useless and unwieldy accessory; to spew out like a luminous cascade any offensive or loving thought, or to cherish it - with the lively satisfaction that it's all precisely the same thing... (tzara: dada manifesto 1918.) - * Unsubscribing? Mail majordomo@roughdraft.org with the message * UNSUBSCRIBE BANANAFISH From oconnort@panix.com Thu Mar 18 01:00:45 2004 Received: by dont.panix.com (8.11.6p2-a/8.8.8/PanixLC1.7) id i2I60jO14249 for bananafish-outgoing; Thu, 18 Mar 2004 01:00:45 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <40583DB7.8010309@drew.edu> Date: Wed, 17 Mar 2004 06:59:51 -0500 From: James Rovira User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.4) Gecko/20030624 Netscape/7.1 (ax) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: bananafish@roughdraft.org Subject: Re: SmokeLong Quarterly References: <20040316015516.73215.qmail@web14006.mail.yahoo.com> <20040317025200.29602@mail.panix.com> In-Reply-To: <20040317025200.29602@mail.panix.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-bananafish@roughdraft.org Precedence: bulk Reply-To: bananafish@roughdraft.org The story seems to me to communicate the idea that the novel _Catcher in the Rye_, and the character Holden Caulfield, has hijacked Salinger's life, so he's trying to kill off Holden to get his life back. It imagines that Salinger resents the success of Catcher and, by extension, the novel itself because of the intrusions on his privacy that its popularity led to. Plausible. Not a very original idea, but a nice way of expressing it. Jim Tim O'Connor wrote: >On Mon, Mar 15, 2004, ceciliabaader@yahoo.com said: > > > >>A friend of mine had a story in this issue, and I noticed the following: >> >>http://smokelong.com/flash.asp?id=543 >> >>Thought one or two of you might be interested. I'll save my comments >>until later. >> >> > >I don't know what to say ... it was DISTURBING in some way. I don't >think I can explain. > >--tim > > > > - * Unsubscribing? Mail majordomo@roughdraft.org with the message * UNSUBSCRIBE BANANAFISH From oconnort@panix.com Thu Mar 18 01:00:47 2004 Received: by dont.panix.com (8.11.6p2-a/8.8.8/PanixLC1.7) id i2I60lD14287 for bananafish-outgoing; Thu, 18 Mar 2004 01:00:47 -0500 (EST) From: "Tim O'Connor" To: bananafish Subject: apologies Date: Thu, 18 Mar 2004 00:57:45 -0500 Message-Id: <20040318055745.27434@mail.panix.com> X-Mailer: CTM PowerMail 4.2.1 us Carbon MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-bananafish@roughdraft.org Precedence: bulk Reply-To: bananafish@roughdraft.org My apologies for there being no list mail today. I was indisposed (nice vague term, that) and could not get my hands near a keyboard until 1 am. Geez, I missed all of St. Patrick's Day (for you who "celebrate" it). Oh, well. Now, le deluge, in a moment. --tim - * Unsubscribing? Mail majordomo@roughdraft.org with the message * UNSUBSCRIBE BANANAFISH From oconnort@panix.com Thu Mar 18 01:00:46 2004 Received: from localhost (localhost [[UNIX: localhost]]) by dont.panix.com (8.11.6p2-a/8.8.8/PanixLC1.7) id i2I60k414269 for bananafish-outgoing; Thu, 18 Mar 2004 01:00:46 -0500 (EST) From: jrovira@drew.edu To: bananafish@roughdraft.org Subject: NYTimes.com Article: Op-Ed Columnist: Scandal at the U.N. Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII MIME-Version: 1.0 Message-Id: <20040317150334.BAD813504B@web38t.prvt.nytimes.com> Date: Wed, 17 Mar 2004 10:03:34 -0500 (EST) Sender: owner-bananafish@roughdraft.org Precedence: bulk Reply-To: bananafish@roughdraft.org The article below from NYTimes.com has been sent to you by jrovira@drew.edu. The world is angry, not on principle, but because we've messed with their cash cow... jrovira@drew.edu /--------- E-mail Sponsored by Fox Searchlight ------------\ THE DREAMERS - IN SELECT CITIES Set against the turbulent political backdrop of 1968 France when the voice of youth was reverberating around Europe, THE DREAMERS is a story of self-discovery as three students test each other to see just how far they will go. THE DREAMERS is now playing in select theaters. for more info: http://www.foxsearchlight.com/thedreamers/index_nyt.html \----------------------------------------------------------/ Op-Ed Columnist: Scandal at the U.N. March 17, 2004 By WILLIAM SAFIRE The cover-up in the office of the U.N. secretary general of a multibillion-dollar financial fraud known as the Iraqi oil-for-food program is beginning to come apart. The scandal has been brewing for years. The first I learned of it was in a New York Times Op-Ed article last April by the journalist Claudia Rosett charging that the U.N.'s secretive oversight of more than $100 billion in Iraqi oil exports and supposed humanitarian imports was "an invitation to kickbacks, political back-scratching and smuggling done under cover of relief operations." After checking with Kurdish sources in Iraq, I reported that half the money allocated to their people had been blocked by Saddam "conspiring with bureaucrats in the U.N. Plaza." Kofi Annan's right-hand man, Benon Sevan, had been named by the secretary general to head the oil-for-food program and report directly to him. Though he could not deny a favored French banking connection, Sevan branded as "inaccuracies" charges by Ms. Rosett and me of secrecy, citing a hundred audits in five years. But he refused to make public what companies in what countries got Saddam's largess. Now, thanks to evidence of systematic thievery on a huge scale, discovered by free Iraqis in Baghdad, the whole rotten mess of 10 percent kickbacks on billions in contracts is coming to light. In detailed accounts, Susan Sachs in The Times, Therese Raphael in The Wall Street Journal, and Charles Laurence and Inigo Gilmore of London's Daily Telegraph have flipped over the flat rock of corruption. Assistant Secretary General Sevan, now on an extended vacation until his retirement next month, denied through a spokesman "that I had received oil or oil monies from the former Iraqi regime" and demanded that his doubters produce documentary evidence. The Journal then produced a document in Arabic that suggests Sevan received an allocation of 1.8 million barrels of oil. Under the U.N. bureaucracy's nose - and I suspect, in some cases, with its collusion - nearly three-quarters of the suppliers jacked up their prices to pay the 10 percent kickback. These included European manufacturers, Arab trade brokers, Russian factories and Chinese state-owned companies. Corruption's take - out of the mouths of hungry Iraqi children - was estimated by Sachs of The Times at $2.3 billion. Hired by the U.N. to monitor these imports was a Swiss-based firm, Cotecna, which was paid out of the exorbitant fee the U.N. charged for overhead. Ms. Rosett, writing in National Review last week, notes that Kojo Annan, the secretary general's son, was once on staff and later a consultant to that tight-lipped company. In denying to The Telegraph in 1999 that he worked on the U.N. oil-for-food account, Kojo Annan said, "The decision is made by the contracts committee, not by Kofi Annan." About that "661 compliance committee," on which the U.S. has a seat and to which the secretary general now wants to pass the buck: a U.S. official familiar with its operation tells me that "its purpose was formally to approve what the U.N. staff recommended. Only the U.S. and the U.K. experts ever put a hold on a contract, and that about items that had dual use in weaponry. Few U.S. firms got contracts, and those that did worked through middlemen to avoid the General Accounting Office." Annan's office kept blaming the 661 committee and stonewalling the press until an irate Iraqi Governing Council hired the accountants KPMG and a law firm to investigate what its advisers told Annan was "one of the world's most disgraceful scams." Under mounting pressure, this week the U.N. let it be known that its laughably titled Office of Internal Oversight Services would look into the matter. An internal whitewash? Not nearly good enough. Will the Security Council appoint an independent counsel to clean house in an inept or corrupt Secretariat? No, because France and Russia had their hands in the kickback till. But free Iraq, backed up by the U.S., is not helpless. Our Congress supplies 22 percent of the U.N. budget, and we have a right to an accounting. Chairman Henry Hyde, of House International Relations, calls this "an outrage" and will arrange for a G.A.O. briefing this week, to be followed by open hearings in April. The U.N. can redeem its sullied reputation by helping to shape Iraq's future. To take up that challenge, it must have clean hands.   E-mail: safire@nytimes.com http://www.nytimes.com/2004/03/17/opinion/17SAFI.html?ex=1080535813&ei=1&en=4cd8fac885b5252a --------------------------------- Get Home Delivery of The New York Times Newspaper. Imagine reading The New York Times any time & anywhere you like! Leisurely catch up on events & expand your horizons. Enjoy now for 50% off Home Delivery! Click here: http://homedelivery.nytimes.com/HDS/SubscriptionT1.do?mode=SubscriptionT1&ExternalMediaCode=W24AF HOW TO ADVERTISE --------------------------------- For information on advertising in e-mail newsletters or other creative advertising opportunities with The New York Times on the Web, please contact onlinesales@nytimes.com or visit our online media kit at http://www.nytimes.com/adinfo For general information about NYTimes.com, write to help@nytimes.com. Copyright 2004 The New York Times Company - * Unsubscribing? Mail majordomo@roughdraft.org with the message * UNSUBSCRIBE BANANAFISH From oconnort@panix.com Thu Mar 18 02:21:20 2004 Received: from localhost (localhost [[UNIX: localhost]]) by dont.panix.com (8.11.6p2-a/8.8.8/PanixLC1.7) id i2I7LKm18148 for bananafish-outgoing; Thu, 18 Mar 2004 02:21:20 -0500 (EST) From: BookBritt99@aol.com Message-ID: <97.4576af67.2d8a99ac@aol.com> Date: Thu, 18 Mar 2004 01:20:28 EST Subject: Re: Writing Mania To: bananafish@roughdraft.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="-----------------------------1079590828" X-Mailer: 9.0 for Windows sub 5106 Sender: owner-bananafish@roughdraft.org Precedence: bulk Reply-To: bananafish@roughdraft.org -------------------------------1079590828 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit I just wanted to mention that hyperlexia is not just the manic need to read-- it's a very strange disorder usually only found in children, and can be so extreme, it's sometimes diagnosed as autism, or obesessive complusive disorder. There are all sorts of strange symptoms-- selective hearing, the ability to memorize without comprehending meaning, the inability to comprehend spoken language, even. Sometimes they even have very heightened senses, like being able to smell really well, but then can't hear at all. Fascinating, really. Thank you for the book title-- I am very intrigued. Britt -------------------------------1079590828 Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
I just wanted to mention that hyperlexia is not just the manic need to=20= read-- it's a very strange disorder usually only found in children, and can=20= be so extreme, it's sometimes diagnosed as autism, or obesessive complusive=20= disorder.  There are all sorts of strange symptoms-- selective hearing,= the ability to memorize without comprehending meaning, the inability to com= prehend spoken language, even.  Sometimes they even have very heightene= d senses, like being able to smell really well, but then can't hear at all.&= nbsp; Fascinating, really.  Thank you for the book title-- I am very in= trigued.
Britt
-------------------------------1079590828-- - * Unsubscribing? Mail majordomo@roughdraft.org with the message * UNSUBSCRIBE BANANAFISH From oconnort@panix.com Thu Mar 18 02:46:02 2004 Received: from localhost (localhost [[UNIX: localhost]]) by dont.panix.com (8.11.6p2-a/8.8.8/PanixLC1.7) id i2I7k2319210 for bananafish-outgoing; Thu, 18 Mar 2004 02:46:02 -0500 (EST) From: "Tim O'Connor" To: bananafish Subject: Re: Writing Mania Date: Thu, 18 Mar 2004 02:30:54 -0500 Message-Id: <20040318073054.15138@mail.panix.com> In-Reply-To: <97.4576af67.2d8a99ac@aol.com> References: <97.4576af67.2d8a99ac@aol.com> X-Mailer: CTM PowerMail 4.2.1 us Carbon MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-bananafish@roughdraft.org Precedence: bulk Reply-To: bananafish@roughdraft.org On Thu, Mar 18, 2004, BookBritt99@aol.com said: >I just wanted to mention that hyperlexia is not just the manic need to read-- >it's a very strange disorder usually only found in children, and can be so >extreme, it's sometimes diagnosed as autism, or obesessive complusive >disorder. >There are all sorts of strange symptoms-- selective hearing, the ability to >memorize without comprehending meaning, the inability to comprehend spoken >language, even. Sometimes they even have very heightened senses, like >being able >to smell really well, but then can't hear at all. Fascinating, really. >Thank you for the book title-- I am very intrigued. You're welcome; I'm glad to see someone else interested in this. She really skates on very thin ice, balancing between creativity and madness, between OCD and a state of driven behavior, and she makes a few fascinating points about writers who appear to have been either manic- depressive (e.g., Sylvia Plath) or epileptic (Dostoevsky), or artists who fall into several categories (van Gogh, an obvious case). I would be eager to discuss this book here if a few people happened to read it and were interested in discussion. Even JDS makes a (small) appearance there. I would also be intrigued by what Scottie thinks. For instance, his assessment of purple ink (not purple prose) is endorsed by this neurologist, and green ink too comes in for some scrutiny. Michael Anello remarks on writing with white ink. Actually, Michael, I am very engaged by materials (such as good writing paper and a smooth, flexible nib) and by color; from time to time, I do indeed write on black paper with white ink. I have to be in the mood for it, but I like the way it looks. --tim - * Unsubscribing? Mail majordomo@roughdraft.org with the message * UNSUBSCRIBE BANANAFISH From oconnort@panix.com Thu Mar 18 09:10:48 2004 Received: from localhost (localhost [[UNIX: localhost]]) by dont.panix.com (8.11.6p2-a/8.8.8/PanixLC1.7) id i2IEAmU07420 for bananafish-outgoing; Thu, 18 Mar 2004 09:10:48 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <000701c40ccc$009a7240$17a57dc2@j8l6n9> From: "Scottie Bowman" To: References: <20040317150334.BAD813504B@web38t.prvt.nytimes.com> Subject: Kofi's Krapulous Keystone Kops Date: Thu, 18 Mar 2004 09:32:12 -0000 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Sender: owner-bananafish@roughdraft.org Precedence: bulk Reply-To: bananafish@roughdraft.org As Immanuel laughingly remarked to his little dog Putzi: 'Aus so kummen Holze, als woraus der Mensch gemackt ist, kann nichts ganz Gerades gezimmert werden....' What amazes me is that anyone anywhere ever bothered with the UN - except perhaps as a fig leaf for their own nefariousness. But that's one of the many great things about being 76. It isn't history. You can actually remember when it went so ludicrously wrong the first time. Scottie B. - * Unsubscribing? Mail majordomo@roughdraft.org with the message * UNSUBSCRIBE BANANAFISH From oconnort@panix.com Thu Mar 18 09:10:49 2004 Received: by dont.panix.com (8.11.6p2-a/8.8.8/PanixLC1.7) id i2IEAnH07425 for bananafish-outgoing; Thu, 18 Mar 2004 09:10:49 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <20040318113339.70017.qmail@web40102.mail.yahoo.com> Date: Thu, 18 Mar 2004 03:33:39 -0800 (PST) From: ana buneta Subject: Re: bananafish-digest V1 #1023 To: bananafish@roughdraft.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Sender: owner-bananafish@roughdraft.org Precedence: bulk Reply-To: bananafish@roughdraft.org I'm resending this... :( grrrrrrrrrr :) it's intuition :))) At first I wrote 'you know the essence is still there (somewhere :)), even in croatian :))' :) I agree with you, specially about the 'all the little cultural signifiers that are carried along with his choice of, and arrangement of, words.' Yeap. I'm aware of that. That just can't be translated, and even if I read it in original I still don't get all of it as you can. I'm not thinking that much about the Catcher (more about Seymour and Franny), but there is one thing I hate about our translation, specially serbian - declination of name Phoebe. I can't read that. Most of the names can be declined but not this name. It's so awful. And this sort of things. It's nothing with nacionalism (some of their solutions in grammar I prefer more than in croatian), but even some croatian translation use some serbian words (maybe/probably because it was still serbo-croatian language) that just don't fit. Or maybe it is mine perception of certain words that sound more rural (because they are serbian?) and don't get along with Holden's language. Words that even some young man wondering around Zagreb certainly wouldn't use. The question is: would it be used in Belgrade? I don't think so. So, for me, some words that are chosen for our translation wouldn't even fit in character, in Holden as young person. And the rest of it... But you know, we are fortunate to have movies with subtitles (not synchronized), and I believe we gain a lot from it, just listening. We are picking it out very much. Please, don't judge everything I write on my example. :)) I think I'll stop now, before somebody starts yelling 'Digression!' :) Now I'm sorry that I mentioned translation at first place :) What I wanted to say is that I'm more interested in what's important in the story than in translation. and I really don't understand what do you really want to know? I mean, why are you interested in croatian translation :) I guess I would enjoy discussing it with some Serb, Croat, etc. but what it means to some usa guy? Anything else Nope. Ana ><><>< ===== IF YOU LOOK FOR TRUTH, YOU MAY FIND COMFORT IN THE END; IF YOU LOOK FOR COMFORT, YOU WILL NOT GET EITHER COMFORT OR TRUTH- ONLY SOFTSOAP AND WISHFUL THINKING TO BEGIN WITH AND, IN THE END, DESPAIR. (C.S.Lewis) __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail - More reliable, more storage, less spam http://mail.yahoo.com - * Unsubscribing? Mail majordomo@roughdraft.org with the message * UNSUBSCRIBE BANANAFISH From oconnort@panix.com Thu Mar 18 18:27:22 2004 Received: by dont.panix.com (8.11.6p2-a/8.8.8/PanixLC1.7) id i2INRMt07146 for bananafish-outgoing; Thu, 18 Mar 2004 18:27:22 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <4059B423.3080202@drew.edu> Date: Thu, 18 Mar 2004 09:37:23 -0500 From: James Rovira User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.3) Gecko/20030312 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en, de, de-at, de-de, fr-fr, es-pr MIME-Version: 1.0 To: bananafish@roughdraft.org Subject: Re: bananafish-digest V1 #1023 References: <20040317235306.HNVH25650.fepkx2@[212.91.98.73]> In-Reply-To: <20040317235306.HNVH25650.fepkx2@[212.91.98.73]> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-2; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-bananafish@roughdraft.org Precedence: bulk Reply-To: bananafish@roughdraft.org Ha...thanks much for responding. It's great. Just what I was looking for. I was curious because we had some discussions (as you know) some time back about translations, etc. I really like what you say about some of the language being too rural (yeah...that wouldn't fit at all). Jim ana wrote: >Or maybe it is mine >perception of certain words that sound more rural (because >they are serbian?) and don’t get along with Holden’s >language. Words that even some young man wondering around >Zagreb certainly wouldn’t use. The question is: would it be >used in Belgrade? I don’t think so. > > > - * Unsubscribing? Mail majordomo@roughdraft.org with the message * UNSUBSCRIBE BANANAFISH From oconnort@panix.com Thu Mar 18 18:27:24 2004 Received: by dont.panix.com (8.11.6p2-a/8.8.8/PanixLC1.7) id i2INROC07179 for bananafish-outgoing; Thu, 18 Mar 2004 18:27:24 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <200403181618.i2IGI6FU012737@theseus.peterson.af.mil> From: Yocum Daniel R Civ 21 CES/CEOE To: "'bananafish@roughdraft.org'" Subject: RE: Kofi's Krapulous Keystone Kops Date: Thu, 18 Mar 2004 16:17:54 -0000 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2657.72) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Sender: owner-bananafish@roughdraft.org Precedence: bulk Reply-To: bananafish@roughdraft.org "amazes me" and "one of the many great things about being 76", A sign of Late onset adolescence? I find it just to hard to believe Scottie, it just bewilders, astonishes, perplexes, and astounds me but surprisingly leaves me unamazed. Daniel As Immanuel laughingly remarked to his little dog Putzi: 'Aus so kummen Holze, als woraus der Mensch gemackt ist, kann nichts ganz Gerades gezimmert werden....' What amazes me is that anyone anywhere ever bothered with the UN - except perhaps as a fig leaf for their own nefariousness. But that's one of the many great things about being 76. It isn't history. You can actually remember when it went so ludicrously wrong the first time. Scottie B. - * Unsubscribing? Mail majordomo@roughdraft.org with the message * UNSUBSCRIBE BANANAFISH From oconnort@panix.com Thu Mar 18 18:27:21 2004 Received: from localhost (localhost [[UNIX: localhost]]) by dont.panix.com (8.11.6p2-a/8.8.8/PanixLC1.7) id i2INRLq07140 for bananafish-outgoing; Thu, 18 Mar 2004 18:27:21 -0500 (EST) X400-Received: by mta Salem-MTA1 in /c=US/admd= /prmd=or.gov/; Relayed; 18 Mar 2004 13:04:10 -0800 X400-Received: by /c=US/admd= /prmd=or.gov/; Relayed; 18 Mar 2004 13:04:10 -0800 X400-MTS-Identifier: [/c=US/admd= /prmd=or.gov/; 405A0EBD.ADC2.6F6E.000] Content-Identifier: 01FC9405A0ECA005 Content-Return: Allowed X400-Content-Type: P2-1988 ( 22 ) Conversion: Allowed Original-Encoded-Information-Types: IA5-Text Disclose-Recipients: Prohibited Alternate-Recipient: Allowed X400-Originator: Michael.J.Anello@state.or.us X400-Recipients: non-disclosure; Message-Id: <405A0EBD.ADC2.6F6E.000*/c=us/admd=/prmd=or.gov/o=HR/ou=gwise/s=Anello/g=Michael/i=J/@MHS> Date: 18 Mar 2004 13:04:10 -0800 From: ANELLO Michael J To: bananafish@roughdraft.org, tim@roughdraft.org Subject: Re: Writing Mania Sender: owner-bananafish@roughdraft.org Precedence: bulk Reply-To: bananafish@roughdraft.org well, tim. as you know. i am criminally disturbed with a penchant for digging and a severe desire for any type of grey juice with my enchiladas. perhaps writing white on black could clue people in as to what's going on behind the scenes. perhaps. -mike >>> tim@roughdraft.org 03/17/04 11:46PM >>> Michael Anello remarks on writing with white ink. Actually, Michael, I am very engaged by materials (such as good writing paper and a smooth, flexible nib) and by color; from time to time, I do indeed write on black paper with white ink. I have to be in the mood for it, but I like the way it looks. --tim - * Unsubscribing? Mail majordomo@roughdraft.org with the message * UNSUBSCRIBE BANANAFISH From oconnort@panix.com Thu Mar 18 18:27:22 2004 Received: from localhost (localhost [[UNIX: localhost]]) by dont.panix.com (8.11.6p2-a/8.8.8/PanixLC1.7) id i2INRMg07152 for bananafish-outgoing; Thu, 18 Mar 2004 18:27:22 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <4059B70F.1060202@drew.edu> Date: Thu, 18 Mar 2004 09:49:51 -0500 From: James Rovira User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.3) Gecko/20030312 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en, de, de-at, de-de, fr-fr, es-pr MIME-Version: 1.0 To: bananafish@roughdraft.org Subject: The Roots of Language References: <97.4576af67.2d8a99ac@aol.com> <20040318073054.15138@mail.panix.com> In-Reply-To: <20040318073054.15138@mail.panix.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-bananafish@roughdraft.org Precedence: bulk Reply-To: bananafish@roughdraft.org This was really, really interesting... Jim PS funny, Scottie... The New York Times on the Web March 16, 2004 A Biological Dig for the Roots of Language By NICHOLAS WADE Once upon a time, there were very few human languages and perhaps only one, and if so, all of the 6,000 or so languages spoken round the world today must be descended from it. If that family tree of human language could be reconstructed and its branching points dated, a wonderful new window would be opened onto the human past. Yet in the view of many historical linguists, the chances of drawing up such a tree are virtually nil and those who suppose otherwise are chasing a tiresome delusion. Languages change so fast, the linguists! point out, that their genealogies can be traced back only a few thousand years at best before the signal dissolves completely into noise: witness how hard Chaucer is to read just 600 years later. But the linguists' problem has recently attracted a new group of researchers who are more hopeful of success. They are biologists who have developed sophisticated mathematical tools for drawing up family trees of genes and species. Because the same problems crop up in both gene trees and language trees, the biologists are confident that their tools will work with languages, too. The biologists' latest foray onto the linguists' turf is a reconstruction of the Indo-European family of languages by Dr. Russell D. Gray, an evolutionary biologist at the University of Auckland in New Zealand. The family includes extinct languages like Hittite of ancient Turkey, and Tokharian, once spoken in Central Asia, as well as the Indian languages and Iranian in one major branch! and all European languages except Basque in another. Dr. Gray' s results, published in November in Nature with his colleague Quentin Atkinson, have major implications, if correct, for archaeology as well as for linguistics. The shape of his tree is unsurprising it arranges the Indo-European languages in much the same way as linguists do, using conventional methods of comparison. But the dates he puts on the tree are radically older. Dr. Gray's calculations show that the ancestral tongue known as proto-Indo-European existed some 8,700 years ago (give or take 1,200 years), making it considerably older than linguists have assumed is likely. The age of proto-Indo-European bears on a longstanding archaeological dispute. Some researchers, following the lead of Dr. Marija Gimbutas, who died in 1994, believe that the Indo-European languages were spread by warriors moving from their homeland in the Russian steppes, north of the Black and Caspian Seas, some time after 6,000 years ago. A rival theory, proposed by Dr. Colin Ren! frew of the University of Cambridge, holds that the Indo-Europeans were the first farmers who lived in ancient Turkey and that their language expanded not by conquest but with the spread of agriculture some 10,000 to 8,000 years ago. Dr. Gray's date, if accepted, would support the Renfrew position. Several linguists said Dr. Gray's tree was the right shape, but added that it told them nothing fresh, and that his dates were way off. "This method is not giving anything new," said Dr. Jay Jasanoff, a Harvard expert on Indo-European. As for the dates, Dr. Jasanoff said, "The numbers they have got seem extremely wrong to me." Dr. Don Ringe, a linguist at the University of Pennsylvania who has taken a particular interest in computer modeling of language, said that Dr. Gray's approach was worth pursuing but that glottochronology, the traditional method of dating languages, had "failed to live up to its promise so often that convincing linguists there is anyth! ing there is an uphill battle." In the biologists' camp, howeve r, there is a feeling that the linguists do not yet fully understand how well the new techniques sidestep the pitfalls of the older method. The lack of novelty in Dr. Gray's tree of Indo-European languages is its best feature, biologists say, because it validates the method he used to construct it. Most historical linguists know a few languages very well but less often consider the pattern of change affecting many languages, said Dr. Mark Pagel, an evolutionary biologist at the University of Reading. "The field is being driven by people who are not confronted with the broad sweep of linguistic evolution and is being invaded by people like me who are only interested in the broad sweep," Dr. Pagel said. Glottochronology was invented by the linguist Morris Swadesh in 1952. It is based on the compiling of a core list of 100 or 200 words that Swadesh believed were particularly resistant to change. Languages could then be compared on the basis of how many cog! nate words on a Swadesh list they shared in common. Cognates are verbal cousins, like the Greek podos and the English foot, both descended from a common ancestor. The more cognates two languages share, the more recently they split apart. Swadesh and others then tried to quantify the method, deriving the date that two languages split from their percentage of shared cognates. The method gave striking results, considering its simplicity, but not all of the findings were right. Glottochronology suffered from several problems. It assumed that languages changed at a constant rate, and it was vulnerable to unrecognized borrowings of words by one language from another, making them seem closer than they really were. Because of these and other problems, many linguists have given up on glottochronology, showing more interest in an ingenious dating method known as linguistic paleontology. The idea is to infer words for items in the material culture of an ear! ly language, and to correlate them with the appearance of such items i n the archaeological record. Cognates for the word wheel exist in many branches of the Indo-European family tree, and linguists are confident that they can reconstruct the ancestral word in proto-Indo-European. It is, they say, "k'ek'los," the presumed forebear of words like "chakras," meaning wheel or circle in Sanskrit, "kuklos," meaning wheel or circle in Greek, as well as the English word "wheel." The earliest wheels appear in the archaeological record around 5,500 years ago. So the proto-Indo-European language could not have started to split into its daughter tongues much before that date, some linguists argue. If the wheel was invented after the split, each language would have a different or borrowed word for it. The dates on the earliest branches of Dr. Gray's tree are some 2,000 years earlier than the dates arrived at by linguistic paleontology. "Since `wheel' is shared by Tocharian, Greek, Sanskrit and Germanic," said Bill Darden, an expert on I! ndo-European linguistic history at the University of Chicago, "and there is no evidence for wheels before the fourth millennium B.C., then having Tokharian split off 7,900 years ago and Balto-Slavic at 6,500 years ago are way out of line." Dr. Gray, however, defends his dates, and points out a flaw in the wheel argument. What the daughter languages of proto-Indo-European inherited, he says, was not necessarily the word for wheel but the word "k'el," meaning "to rotate," from which each language may independently have derived its word for wheel. If so, the speakers of proto-Indo-European could have lived long before the invention of the wheel. His tree, Dr. Gray said, was derived with the methods used by biologists to avoid problems identical to those in glottochronology. Genes, like languages, do not mutate at a constant rate. And organisms, particularly bacteria, often borrow genes rather than inheriting them from a common ancestor. Biologists have also lear! ned that trees of any great complexity cannot be drawn up by subjectiv e methods. Mathematical methods are required, like having a computer generate all possible trees a number that quickly runs way beyond the trillions and then deciding statistically which class of trees is more probable than the rest. Dr. Gray based his tree on the Dyen list, a set of Indo-European words judged by linguists to be cognates, and he anchored the tree to 14 known historical dates for splits between Indo-European languages. Many of the Dyen list cognates are marked uncertain, so Dr. Gray was able to test whether omission of the doubtful cognates made any difference (it did not). He also tested many other possible assumptions, but none of them produced an age for proto-Indo-European anywhere near the date of 6,000 years ago favored by linguists. "This is why our results should be taken seriously by both linguists and anyone else interested in the origin of the Indo-European languages," he wrote, in a recent reply to his critics. "We have! n't repeated the errors of glottochronology," Dr. Gray said in an interview. "What we are doing is adding value, since we can make inferences about time depths which can't be made reliably in other ways." Dr. Gray said he had formed collaborations with linguists and hoped they would give his tree a warmer reception once his critics understood that he had not made the errors they cited. Some linguists are interested in the biologists' approach. "I think these methods are extremely promising," said Dr. April McMahon of the University of Sheffield and the president of the Linguistics Association of Great Britain, though she expressed concern about Dr. Gray's emphasis on dating language splits. If the biologists' methods can date languages that existed 9,000 years ago, how much further back can they probe? "Words exist that can in principle resolve 20,000-year-old linguistic relationships," Dr. Pagel of Reading wrote in a recent symposium volu! me, "Time Depth in Historical Linguistics," adding that "words that ca n resolve even deeper linguistic relationships are not out of the question." Many linguists believe that once two languages have drifted so far apart that they share only 5 percent or so of their vocabulary, chance resemblances will overwhelm the true ones, setting a firm limit on how far back their ancestry can be traced. "That's a mistaken reasoning which shows the linguists are relying on a model of evolution they trash when they see it written down," Dr. Pagel said. He added that their argument assumed a constant rate of language change, the very point they know is wrong in glottochronology. Geneticists believe modern humans may have left Africa as recently as 50,000 years ago, perhaps in a single migration with very small numbers. Reconstructing language of 20,000 years ago would be a big stride toward whatever tongue those first emigrants spoke. But Dr. Gray has no plans in that direction. "It's hard enough to work out what happened ! 10,000 years ago, let alone 30,000 years ago," he said. - * Unsubscribing? Mail majordomo@roughdraft.org with the message * UNSUBSCRIBE BANANAFISH From oconnort@panix.com Thu Mar 18 18:27:23 2004 Received: by dont.panix.com (8.11.6p2-a/8.8.8/PanixLC1.7) id i2INRNT07164 for bananafish-outgoing; Thu, 18 Mar 2004 18:27:23 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <200403181543.i2IFhPwv022195@theseus.peterson.af.mil> From: Yocum Daniel R Civ 21 CES/CEOE To: "'bananafish@roughdraft.org'" Subject: RE: Salinger.org works again...Until Huggy Bear takes all her mon ey away Date: Thu, 18 Mar 2004 15:43:23 -0000 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2657.72) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Sender: owner-bananafish@roughdraft.org Precedence: bulk Reply-To: bananafish@roughdraft.org Edna and Jerome can't count, hey it's all Maya right? 3, 10, 12, all the same, but who can count on anything now days anyway? If you can you aren't enlightened right? Daniel -----Original Message----- From: ANELLO Michael J [mailto:Michael.J.Anello@state.or.us] Sent: Wednesday, March 17, 2004 11:16 AM To: bananafish@roughdraft.org Subject: Salinger.org works again... What does anyone think about the "Young Folks Mystery?" http://www.salinger.org/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=31 - * Unsubscribing? Mail majordomo@roughdraft.org with the message * UNSUBSCRIBE BANANAFISH - * Unsubscribing? Mail majordomo@roughdraft.org with the message * UNSUBSCRIBE BANANAFISH From oconnort@panix.com Thu Mar 18 18:27:23 2004 Received: by dont.panix.com (8.11.6p2-a/8.8.8/PanixLC1.7) id i2INRNS07174 for bananafish-outgoing; Thu, 18 Mar 2004 18:27:23 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <200403181600.i2IG0Mia002288@theseus.peterson.af.mil> From: Yocum Daniel R Civ 21 CES/CEOE To: "'bananafish@roughdraft.org'" Subject: RE: Writing Mania Date: Thu, 18 Mar 2004 16:00:21 -0000 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2657.72) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Sender: owner-bananafish@roughdraft.org Precedence: bulk Reply-To: bananafish@roughdraft.org Very interesting Tim. When I write the tools are transparent to me, I write in my mind and the paper, pens, pencil, charcoal, napkin, ripped open envelope, clear border of a scrap of newspaper, scrap of cardboard carton, computer screen, blank end sheets of a book, or even a pocket knife and scrap of lumber are all just containers, wrappers to hold the thoughts so I won't forget. Later I'll make it all neat but that would be for you, the reader, or to fit more efficiently in my breast pocket. When I draw then the tools are little more important but only a little. Daniel Michael Anello remarks on writing with white ink. Actually, Michael, I am very engaged by materials (such as good writing paper and a smooth, flexible nib) and by color; from time to time, I do indeed write on black paper with white ink. I have to be in the mood for it, but I like the way it looks. --tim - * Unsubscribing? Mail majordomo@roughdraft.org with the message * UNSUBSCRIBE BANANAFISH From oconnort@panix.com Thu Mar 18 18:27:23 2004 Received: by dont.panix.com (8.11.6p2-a/8.8.8/PanixLC1.7) id i2INRNp07158 for bananafish-outgoing; Thu, 18 Mar 2004 18:27:23 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <002c01c40cfb$f4efd720$90573151@GEORGES> From: =?iso-8859-1?Q?Val=E9rie_Aron?= To: References: <97.4576af67.2d8a99ac@aol.com> <20040318073054.15138@mail.panix.com> Subject: Re: Writing Mania Date: Thu, 18 Mar 2004 16:16:00 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1158 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1165 Sender: owner-bananafish@roughdraft.org Precedence: bulk Reply-To: bananafish@roughdraft.org Like chalk on the blackboard? ----- Original Message ----- From: "Tim O'Connor" Sent: Thursday, March 18, 2004 8:30 AM > Michael Anello remarks on writing with white ink. Actually, Michael, I > am very engaged by materials (such as good writing paper and a smooth, > flexible nib) and by color; from time to time, I do indeed write on black > paper with white ink. I have to be in the mood for it, but I like the > way it looks. > > --tim - * Unsubscribing? Mail majordomo@roughdraft.org with the message * UNSUBSCRIBE BANANAFISH From oconnort@panix.com Thu Mar 18 18:37:44 2004 Received: from localhost (localhost [[UNIX: localhost]]) by dont.panix.com (8.11.6p2-a/8.8.8/PanixLC1.7) id i2INbio07636 for bananafish-outgoing; Thu, 18 Mar 2004 18:37:44 -0500 (EST) Date: Thu, 18 Mar 2004 18:32:31 -0500 From: "Tim O'Connor" To: bananafish@roughdraft.org Subject: Re: Writing Mania Message-ID: <20040318233231.GA9675@panix.com> References: <97.4576af67.2d8a99ac@aol.com> <20040318073054.15138@mail.panix.com> <002c01c40cfb$f4efd720$90573151@GEORGES> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: <002c01c40cfb$f4efd720$90573151@GEORGES> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.1i Sender: owner-bananafish@roughdraft.org Precedence: bulk Reply-To: bananafish@roughdraft.org On Thu, Mar 18, 2004 at 04:16:00PM +0100, Valérie Aron wrote: > Like chalk on the blackboard? Exactly! I fully admit to being crazy about the tactile side of life. I would guess that if I drove, I'd be likely to drive an automobile that gave me a genuine feeling that I was driving (as opposed to sitting in plush isolation). I usually don't like pencil (it smears when you carry it about with you in your bag or your notebook), but I like inky ink. As anyone here who has had a letter from me may know! --tim - * Unsubscribing? Mail majordomo@roughdraft.org with the message * UNSUBSCRIBE BANANAFISH From oconnort@panix.com Thu Mar 18 21:18:13 2004 Received: from localhost (localhost [[UNIX: localhost]]) by dont.panix.com (8.11.6p2-a/8.8.8/PanixLC1.7) id i2J2IDM14659 for bananafish-outgoing; Thu, 18 Mar 2004 21:18:13 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <20040319005248.91402.qmail@web14005.mail.yahoo.com> Date: Thu, 18 Mar 2004 16:52:48 -0800 (PST) From: Cecilia Baader Subject: Re: The Roots of Language To: bananafish@roughdraft.org In-Reply-To: <4059B70F.1060202@drew.edu> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Sender: owner-bananafish@roughdraft.org Precedence: bulk Reply-To: bananafish@roughdraft.org Interesting, indeed. Once upon a time, I took a linguistics class and focused on something similar in my final paper. Since writing a paper is such a time-consuming exercise and the only person who gets to see it is the professor, it is sometimes disappointing when you realize that nobody else will get to see it once it's done. So. I hope you will indulge me with my little foray into the paper I wrote some time ago on the Sound of God. At the time, I thought it quite clever. Best, Cecilia. The Sound of God: Sound Symbolism and Creation of Meaning I should explain to you, Socrates, that our friend Kratylos has been arguing about names; he says that they are natural and not conventional; not a portion of the human voice which men agree to use; but that there is a truth or correctness in them, which is the same for Hellenes as barbarians. (Plato qtd. in Brown, 1963, p. 110) In his The Hero with a Thousand Faces, Joseph Campbell notes that most, if not all, of the world’s mythologies seem to derive from a single model, an über-myth of an hero who wears a thousand masks as he acts out the same story, time and again. The myth, Campbell states, is the secret opening through which the energy of the universe is made manifest through “spontaneous productions of the psyche,” which make the mysteries of the universe plain (1973, p.4). Humankind’s stories, then, are magic, for they have miraculously replicated themselves across continents through cultures that could have had no contact with each other. The mythologies aren’t the only striking cross-cultural similarities, for even the sounds of the names of the gods ring with the same sonorous tones. Certainly, many similarities in meaning arise because the languages of Europe, the Middle East, and Northern India all arise from a single source: Indo-European (Watkins, 2000). The similarities in these languages were first noticed when the age of colonialism brought Sanskrit to the attention of nineteenth century intellectuals, who immediately noted its similarity to Latin and Greek. English Orientalist Sir William Jones pronounced: The Sanskrit language, whatever be its antiquity, is of a wonderful structure; more perfect than the Greek, more copious than the Latin, and more exquisitely refined than either, yet bearing to both of them a stronger affinity, both in the roots of verbs and in the forms of grammar, than could possibly have been produced by accident; so strong, indeed, that no philologer could examine them all three, without believing them to have sprung from some common source, which, perhaps, no longer exists (Watkins, 2000, p.5). The language that Jones imagined, Indo-European, is what Mary Haas (1969) calls a protolanguage. The protolanguage is the mother language of multiple derivative tongues. It is “reconstructed out of the evidence that is acquired by the careful comparison of the daughter languages” (p. 32). Languages included in the Indo-European group are Indic and Iranian, Hellenic, Armenian, Slavic, Baltic, Albanian, Celtic, Italic, and Germanic, and the extinct Hittite (Watkins, 2000). The most prevalent Indo-European language is, of course, English, which derives from the Germanic languages, but has a highly mixed lexicon, with borrowings from Greek and Latin roots. Consider the word “god.” According to the Oxford English Dictionary (2003), “god” itself derives from the Old High German got and the Gothic guth, meaning ‘voice.’ The ulterior etymology seems to come from the Old Teutonic guδom which most likely derives from ghutóm, the passive participle of the Aryan root gheu-. Two possible roots of gheu- are the Sanskrit hū, meaning ‘to invoke’ or the Sanskrit hu, meaning ‘to pour, to offer sacrifice.’ Both roots are reasonable, as they refer to an object of worship. The Webster’s Third New International Dictionary (1986) traces a different etymology from the Gothic guth, meaning ‘to voice,’ which then derives from the Greek kauchasthai, meaning ‘to boast.’ The Greek derives from the Sanskrit havate, meaning ‘he calls, he invokes.’ In either case, the meaning of the word seems to have something to do with voicing, or calling. This meaning makes sense, for when ancient man wanted or needed something he didn’t have, to whom else should he appeal but his god? The very act of calling to a higher power is replicated in its name. Despite the etymological similarities and shared Indo-European roots, the question still arises: how did this common language form in the first place? When did someone first point to the sky and say, “hu”? The answer is, of course, impossible to determine, for speech predates any writing system. Several theories for the origin of language have been postulated over the years. In his Language: Its Nature Development and Origin, Otto Jespersen discusses the various possibilities postulated over the years about the development of language. The Greeks and Romans believed that sound carried a special, mystical force. For instance, Nigidius Figulus claimed that vos, or ‘you’ is pronounced when one positions one’s lips forward and sends breath toward another person, while nos, or ‘us’ keeps the air close (p. 396). Another theory, the bow-wow theory, is that primitive words were imitations of sounds heard in nature. Humans heard the dogs bark and imitated their sound. However, this was long ago rejected because it bases itself on the premise that lower animals developed speech before humans did. The interjectional, or pooh-pooh theory, proposes that language is derived from instinctual ejaculations, based on pain or other sensations. However, this theory was rejected on the basis of Darwin’s physiological explanations for the sound of many words. Humans say ‘achoo’ because that is the form that the lips take when in the midst of a sneeze. Such ejaculations are merely accidental. Similarly, Max Muller’s ding-dong theory suggests that there is a mystical harmony between sound and sense, since everything that is struck rings, and everything has its particular ring. Language, then, is the product of instinct (p. 415). Noiré’s yo-he-ho theory suggests that, when working, it is a relief to the system to let breath come out strongly, and that this breath vibrates the vocal cords in certain ways. When primitive people performed certain acts together, they would all likely make similar sounds, therefore forming the basis of language. Jespersen (1931) rejects all of these theories in favor of his own, the nightingale theory, developed through listening to the speech of primitive people. Jespersen believes that the cries of young people are strictly for the purpose of attracting the opposite sex: “Language was born in the courting days of mankind” (p. 434). Much like birdsong, primitive humans used sound to attract or warn. In fact, Jespersen feels that song probably arose before speech itself. He compares his theory to Wagner’s leitmotif, because primitive humans probably practiced a similar method in song: “Each kind of work, especially if it is done by many jointly, has it s own kind of song, and … nothing is done except to the song of vocal music” (p. 435). The first words were probably concrete and specialized, like proper names, which were probably pulled from the leitmotifs as the sounds repeated themselves. A possible explanation for the actual sound of words created by primitive man exists in the theory of sound symbolism, the idea that the sound of the word actually conveys some of its meaning. Certainly this theory makes sense for words developed through onomatopoeia. Thunk quite easily expresses its meaning through its sound. Additionally, some words echo the sound of the object they symbolize. Mary Haas (1967) describes how many Native American languages use the sound the goose makes to give it its name: the Notches use lalak, the Tunica lalahki, the Yana use lalaki, the Mutsun lalak, the Nisenam la-lak’, the Chimeriko lalo, and the Miwokan use laŋlaŋ (p.89). Such instances are so widespread that they cannot be coincidence; the sound of things must play some part in word formation. However, Jespersen (1931) notes that even though every language contains words that do not meet the symbolic requirements, but that is no reason to dismiss the theory altogether. Every language has some words that does meet the requirements, and are therefore worthy of study. What is most important about sound symbolism, Jespersen suggests, is not that certain words do not conform to the model, but that words that adhere to the model are more likely to remain in the lexicon. For instance, a word like hullabaloo, which derives from the Irish Ballyhooly, has become popular simply because its sound seems to echo its sense (p.409). Edward Sapir and Stanley Newman (Brown, 1958) performed several studies in which subjects considered nonsense words created using various acceptable vowel and consonant formations, and expressed what relative size and brightness implications could be determined through the sounds. The vowels tended to range, from small to large, in the order [i], [e], [ε], [æ], [ ], [u], [o], and [ ]. The bright to dark scale duplicated the magnitude scale. Interestingly, this scale replicates the receding position of the tongue in the mouth in articulation, decreasing frequencies of the acoustic vocal resonance, and an increasing size in the oral cavity used in pronounciation (p. 113). The word god [g d], then, has a low resonance and a low vowel sound. It would seem to be a very large and dark word, simply by considering its sound. A remarkable phenomenon is the Christian change from Yahweh to Jehovah. Yahweh, the sacred name of god, is a symbol meaning yod-ye-vau-he (YHWH), which are various forms of the Hebrew word ‘to be’ (Maas, 20003). It was never pronounced in Hebrew; rather, Adonai was substituted so as to allow the speaker to refrain from saying the sacred name. Students of Hebrew in the middle ages took the letters YHWH and translated the letters into a Latinate IHUH or JHVH, which was then transliterated into a Latin spelling of IeHoVaH, or Jehovah (Oxford English Dictionary, 2003). This may seem like an historical mistake, but consider the pronounciations of each word. Yahweh [ya-we] resonates at a much higher frequency than Jehovah [j -ho-v ], and its vowel sounds are not as dark. Consider also the Greek theos [θεόs], meaning the spirit, or breath, of god, and the greatest of the gods, Zeus [zus] (Oxford English Dictionary, 2003). Zeus would seem greater than theos, simply because of its sound, for it begins with a voiced consonant z and carries a very low frequency of sound. Theos, which is more of a generic name for the gods, begins with a voiceless consonant θ and carries a slightly higher frequency. If one listened only to the sound of the words, one could assume that Zeus is greater than any of the generic gods of the pantheon, or theos. Finally, the etymology of Allah points to a strengthening of the name of god. According to the Oxford English Dictionary (2003), it is a contraction of the Arabic al-ilah, where al is simply an article meaning ‘the,’ and ilah means god. It was not simply enough for the Arabic Muslims to call god ilah [Il- ]; he had to be the god, allah [ l- ], a word which is far darker and larger, according to the vowel sounds. Whatever the reasons for the names of god, they all seem to adhere to a similar sound system. Whether this sound system is coincidentally developed by different cultures, or if it has some element of symbolism, or if it is simply a product of etymological similarity is impossible to determine, since recordkeeping did not exist at the time of language formation. The similarities exist. The instinctual response to these similarities exist, too. Why is another question entirely. References Brown, R. (1963). Words and things. New York: Free Press of Glencoe. Butin, R. (2003). “Allah.” Catholic encyclopedia. . Campbell, J. (1973). The hero with a thousand faces. Princeton, NJ: Princeton UP. Driscoll, J. (2003). “Deity.” Catholic encyclopedia. . Haas, M.R. (1969). The prehistory of languages. Paris: Mouton. Jespersen, O. (1931). Language: Its nature development and origin. New York: Holt. Maas, A.J. (2003). “Jehovah (Yahweh).” Catholic encyclopedia. . Oxford English dictionary (2003). Pinker, S. (1994). The language instinct: How the mind creates language. New York: HarperPerennial. Watkins, C. (2000). “Indo-European and the Indo-Europeans.” The American heritage dictionary of the English language. Boston: Houghton Mifflin. __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail - More reliable, more storage, less spam http://mail.yahoo.com - * Unsubscribing? Mail majordomo@roughdraft.org with the message * UNSUBSCRIBE BANANAFISH From oconnort@panix.com Thu Mar 18 22:51:49 2004 Received: from localhost (localhost [[UNIX: localhost]]) by dont.panix.com (8.11.6p2-a/8.8.8/PanixLC1.7) id i2J3pnl18998 for bananafish-outgoing; Thu, 18 Mar 2004 22:51:49 -0500 (EST) From: "Tim O'Connor" To: bananafish Subject: Re: Kofi's Krapulous... Date: Thu, 18 Mar 2004 22:48:57 -0500 Message-Id: <20040319034857.16959@mail.panix.com> X-Mailer: CTM PowerMail 4.2.1 us Carbon MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-bananafish@roughdraft.org Precedence: bulk Reply-To: bananafish@roughdraft.org [Dear List: I'm relaying this from Amber Raley (araley@agnesscott.edu), who experienced certain eccentricities related to mail she sends directly to the list. I'm sure the problem is not of her doing, and I am happy to act as a relay. --Your Always Faithful Housekeeper] Quoth araley@agnesscott.edu: Not knowing German I tried Babelfish: It kummen out in such a way wood, when from which humans are gemackt, can nothing completely straight is gezimmert. This reminds me of a review my partner, Matt, received after the release of a new music CD by his band LARVAE. After being translated from German the last sentence of the review inexplicably read: "Scrub brain stimulations." (You can see it for yourself at: http://www.twilight- zone.it/news/archives/electro_english/electro_g-l_e.htm). We liked the quote so well, that we had stickers printed up with the phrase. One other completely off-topic note. I know I hardly ever post, but I've read almost every message since I joined. I can't remember exactly, but I think I've been a member of the list since 1997. So forgive me if I sound sappy, but I sometimes feel like I know you all, especially those who have been around for a while. So as I look back over my many years as a bananafish, I remember turning to the list for help in choosing a college. It was immensely helpful to have another perspective on the subject since no one in my family, immediate or extended, had ever attended college before (or sadly since). As a consequence, I felt (and still feel) very confident about choosing Agnes Scott College over New York University. Now I'm off to graduate school. I also consulted with bananafish before making this decision and several list members responded to my inquiries with information about their institutions of higher learning. So part of this off topic rambling is to thank all of you who have helped me over the years. The other thing is, I just couldn't hold back any longer, I had to make an announcement about my graduate school decision. I will be attending Rice University in Houston, Texas. In the fall, I will begin working towards my PhD in Industrial/Organizational Psychology with the intent to become a professor. So with this announcement comes a few others. If there are any other bananafish in the Atlanta area, I'd love to meet you before I move to Houston in August. If there are any other bananafish near Houston, I'd love to meet you when I move to Houston. But the real reason I'm writing [Ob-Sal Reference] is to see if anyone else has read the Lemony Snicket books. There is a character in some of the later books (not a very nice character I might add) that goes by the name Esme Squalor. I love the books for this and many other literary references that I'm sure go right over the heads of some (but not all!) kids but squarly hit their parents in the forehead. I think a similar description was one applied to the Muppet Show, which I enjoyed very much as a child, but I appreciate even more now. Well that's enough ramblings and reminiscing out of me today. I could live in hope, Amber ----------------- End Forwarded Message ----------------- - * Unsubscribing? Mail majordomo@roughdraft.org with the message * UNSUBSCRIBE BANANAFISH From oconnort@panix.com Thu Mar 18 22:51:48 2004 Received: from localhost (localhost [[UNIX: localhost]]) by dont.panix.com (8.11.6p2-a/8.8.8/PanixLC1.7) id i2J3pmQ18995 for bananafish-outgoing; Thu, 18 Mar 2004 22:51:48 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <405A6372.2080409@drew.edu> Date: Thu, 18 Mar 2004 22:05:22 -0500 From: James Rovira User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.4) Gecko/20030624 Netscape/7.1 (ax) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: bananafish@roughdraft.org Subject: Re: The Roots of Language References: <20040319005248.91402.qmail@web14005.mail.yahoo.com> In-Reply-To: <20040319005248.91402.qmail@web14005.mail.yahoo.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-bananafish@roughdraft.org Precedence: bulk Reply-To: bananafish@roughdraft.org Thanks for posting that -- good read. The histories were interesting, especially of the word "God." Jim Cecilia Baader wrote: >Interesting, indeed. > >Once upon a time, I took a linguistics class and focused on something >similar in my final paper. Since writing a paper is such a time-consuming >exercise and the only person who gets to see it is the professor, it is >sometimes disappointing when you realize that nobody else will get to see >it once it's done. > >So. I hope you will indulge me with my little foray into the paper I wrote >some time ago on the Sound of God. At the time, I thought it quite >clever. > >Best, >Cecilia. > > > - * Unsubscribing? Mail majordomo@roughdraft.org with the message * UNSUBSCRIBE BANANAFISH From oconnort@panix.com Thu Mar 18 23:52:33 2004 Received: from localhost (localhost [[UNIX: localhost]]) by dont.panix.com (8.11.6p2-a/8.8.8/PanixLC1.7) id i2J4qXf23088 for bananafish-outgoing; Thu, 18 Mar 2004 23:52:33 -0500 (EST) From: "Tim O'Connor" To: bananafish Subject: Re: The Roots of Language Date: Thu, 18 Mar 2004 23:08:42 -0500 Message-Id: <20040319040842.12527@mail.panix.com> In-Reply-To: <405A6372.2080409@drew.edu> References: <405A6372.2080409@drew.edu> X-Mailer: CTM PowerMail 4.2.1 us Carbon MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-bananafish@roughdraft.org Precedence: bulk Reply-To: bananafish@roughdraft.org On Thu, Mar 18, 2004, jrovira@drew.edu said: >Thanks for posting that -- good read. The histories were interesting, >especially of the word "God." > >Jim Lord have Murphy, Jim: Do you never sleep?????? Sometimes I suspect you are an automated attendant, except that I've met you, which would mean (if I truly believed that about you) that I have suffered a thoroughly complete break with reality. Which is a stretch even for me. Anyway, it's not a complaint, but is more like a baseball stat, along the lines of Lou Gehrig's having played in 2,180 consecutive games, or Joe DiMaggio's 56-game hitting streak. I vaguely recall that one or both records have been surpassed by non-Yankees, but of course the old numbers are seared in my mind, and the new ones have not been around long enough.... Cheers to all! --tim - * Unsubscribing? Mail majordomo@roughdraft.org with the message * UNSUBSCRIBE BANANAFISH From oconnort@panix.com Thu Mar 18 23:52:35 2004 Received: from localhost (localhost [[UNIX: localhost]]) by dont.panix.com (8.11.6p2-a/8.8.8/PanixLC1.7) id i2J4qZQ23096 for bananafish-outgoing; Thu, 18 Mar 2004 23:52:35 -0500 (EST) From: "Tim O'Connor" To: bananafish