{ "export": { "source": "https://urth.darkrealm.vip/thread/urth/2489", "note": "Exported from an unofficial mirror of a public mailing list. Copyright in each message remains with the person who wrote it. Email addresses are obscured as `user at host`, the form the original archive published. This file was rebuilt from parsed fields rather than retained headers, so it is faithful in content but not byte-exact.", "addresses": "obscured as 'user at host'" }, "archive": "urth", "thread": { "id": 2489, "subject": "Grounded in the text?", "messages": 5, "voices": 3, "first": "2000-12-06T13:42:42+00:00", "last": "2000-12-09T10:42:52+00:00" }, "messages": [ { "message_id": "", "from": { "name": "Dan'l Danehy-Oakes", "address": "ddanehy at siebel.com" }, "date": "2000-12-06T13:42:42+00:00", "subject": "(urth) Grounded in the text?", "in_reply_to": null, "reply_link": null, "blocks": [ { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "Adam Stephanides wrote:\nMuch of what you say I agree with, or need more time to digest. But\nhere's an initial response, to keep the dialogue going while it's \nfresh in my mind:" }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "What he said." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "I'm not sure what you mean here; you seem to be implying a contrast\nbetween \"the story\" and \"the way in which the story is told\" " }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "No; I'm more interested in the contrast between \"telling a story\" and\n\"making points by playing with the readers' heads.\" Wolfe does in fact\nplay with readers' heads; but it seems to me that this is in service \nof the story, rather than the other way around. (Generally.)" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "I think that Wolfe's concern to \"deconstruct\" the act of\nnarration, which you touch upon below, makes him a radical writer,\nalthough he's not as flashy as some self-consciously pomo writers (and\nalthough he sometimes affects an aggressively antimodernist,\nwe-don't-need-no-steenking-critics stance). I think PEACE in particular\nis a very radical, even experimental novel." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Oddly, I don't want to argue this point: but see below. \n\nI also question whether Wolfe is so much deconstructing as \nreconstructing the act of narration, by (for example) insisting on \na particular time and place of narration that affect the manner and \ncontent of the narration. This is not a particularly radical \ngesture; in fact, it's a standard pulp trope. H.P. Lovecraft used \nit (badly) all the time (\"They are right outside the door...\" or \n\"Ia! Ia! Shub-Niggurath, the Goat with a Thousand Young...\" or \"That \nhideous, three-lobed eye...\"). I even ran across it in the Nero \nWolfe novel I reread last night (\"The Second Confession\"), though I \nshan't explain because it involves the solution of a mystery, and\nthose who reveal the ending of mystery novels get a fully deserved,\none-way ride to Hell.\n\nYou might even say that he uses it in radical ways, and I might \nagree; but then, as I said, I think he uses radical tools to \nconservative ends. I'll even grant \"radically conservative,\" \nradical in the same way that the Gospel is radical." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "And, yeah, at first glance,\ntBotNS looks like a save-the-world story, when it's actually more of a\nbildungsroman -- \"The Making of the Messiah, Parts 1-4\" rather than an\nactual\ngospel account, which we then get in URTH." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "And I don't think this example really supports your point. There's a\ngreat deal in tBotNS whose relevance to the bidungsroman story is\ntangential or unclear." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Unclear I'll grant. Tangential? Perhaps -- but tangential to whom? \nNot, I imagine, to Severian. Tangentiality resolves to unclarity-to-us." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "Which novel? There are some I haven't completely worked out, but none of\nthem have completely failed to make any sense to me." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "CASTLEVIEW (I had expected that would be obvious). And I'd love to hear\nwhat you make of it." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "This is the one GW novel about which I can say almost nothing; I've read \nit only once, several years ago. I don't recall it being especially obtuse \n-- not, certainly, compared to PEACE or 5HC -- but I read it under \nsomewhat unfavorable conditions (a redeye flight, and immediately following\nPANDORA) and may have missed its obtuseosity completely." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "I\nremember all the speculation here about \"Suzanne Delage\"; on rereading\nthat story a month or two ago, I came away firmly convinced that it was\njust about what it says it's about, the circumstances surrounding an\nevent that the narrator simply cannot remember because it fails to fit\ninto the context of his life. Because he can't remember it, he can't\nreally tell us anything about it, and so we cannot know what it is. End\nof story." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "A digression here: you apparently believe that the narrator did know\nSuzanne Delage, as do I (am I right?); whereas what the story says it's\nabout is the reasons why he didn't know Suzanne Delage." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "That isn't quite what I said. I said that something happened which the \nnarrator is incapable of remembering, because it doesn't fit into the \nrest of his life. He perceives not-meeting Suzanne as some kind of hole \nin his experience; such a hole may be indicative of the unrememberable, \nthough what exactly he can't remember may not be an encounter with her.\nI suspect it _is_, but would not care to mount an argument to demonstrate \nit. " }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "I agree with this; I think it's another way of approaching the same\nbasic\nthing I am saying: that PEACE is not about the surface events of Weer's\nlife so much as it is about the process of\nrecollection/reliving/reconstruction/falsification (mix 'em and match\n'em, kids! The first one's always free!) by which those events are\nrelated." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "Which, to return to an earlier point, is not something a \"very\nconservative writer\" would be likely to do; in fact, it's exactly the\nsort of thing the modernist authors of the early twentieth century were\npreoccupied by. Nor is it generally the sort of thing people mean when\nthey talk about \"putting the story first.\"" }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "This is the \"see below\" above.\n\nYou seem to be pointing at a kind of \"experimental\" that was very \nexperimental indeed in the 1920s, and that most of the pomos would \nsniff at as mere \"modernism.\" And it is indeed putting the story \nfirst: but the story being put first is not necessarily the story \nthat the reader immediately thinks it is. The process by which some \nevents are related is every bit as legitimate a \"subject\" for a \nstory as the process by which they occurred. \n\nAnother way of taking this: the _Thousand Nights and a Night_ is \nabout the process by which Scheherazade tells a series of stories; \nfurther, some of those stories are themselves about the telling of \nstories. I do not think I am calling Wolfe terribly radical if I \nsuggest he may have adopted this as a model, particularly given \nthe \"Nights\" references in the novel. We might argue from there \nthat PEACE is not precisely a novel, and I won't debate that \npoint; perhaps it isn't." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": " I think one key to the whole shebang is the question of whom\nWeer [thinks he] is writing to; at one point he addresses his readers\nas \"ladies.\" (Olivia?)\n\nIf you're referring to the spot on p. 14 of the Harper & Row edition\n(\"Ladies, this was not what I wanted\"), Weer is referring here not to\nhis readers, but to the women at Weer's birthday party, who apparently\nhave mentally intruded on his visit to Van Ness." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "That is the passage (it's on p13 of my Berkley ed'n), but is in a \nparagraph set off by slugs, between a \"birthday party\" passage and \na \"Doctor Van Ness's office\" passage. The ladies at the party have \njust been discussing the falsification of the Indian treaty.\n\nThe paragraph in full:\n\n\tOne moment, please. Let me stand and walk to the window;\n\tlet me put this broken elm branch -- shaped as though it \n\twere meant to be the antler of a wooden deer, such a deer\n\tas might be found, possibly, under one of the largest\n\toutdoor Christmas trees -- upon the fire. Ladies, this \n\twas not what I wanted. Ladies, I wish to know only if in\n\tmy condition I should exercise or remain still; because\n\tif the answer is that I must exercise I will go looking\n\tfor my scout knife.\n\nNow, I could be wrong, but it seems to me pretty darned clear that \nthis is Weer in the porch of his memory-house, addressing -- well, \nthree possibilities. \n\n1. He is addressing his hypothetical readers.\n2. He is addressing the ladies (Sherry, the nurse, etc.) in the\n doctor's office.\n3. He is addressing the ladies at the party.\n\nBut of these three, only the first is fully coherent; the third \ninvolves a level of incoherency where he simply cannot distinguish\nbetween the porch and the party. I suppose this is no worse than a\nmarginal reading, but I see no special value in a marginal reading \nwhen a fully coherent one is available. (Unless, of course, you \nwant to argue for \"all of the above\" and maybe others.)" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "Is there anyone on this list who seriously maintains that he is \n_not_ dead?" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "I don't recall anybody saying that Weer is definitely not dead, but\nseveral people have discussed the Chinese Pillow reading as one\npossibility. And mantis has, iirc, dropped some hints that Weer \nmay not be dead (which I hope he will eventually flesh out)." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "So do I; but I think the evidence that Weer is dead is overwhelming, \nand will stand with that until and unless." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "I don't see any particular evidence of Weer's lying, except perhaps to\nhimself, defensively. I'm not eliminating it as a possibility, mind, but\nI'd like to see where you think he's lying and why." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "I don't think that Weer has been definitively shown to be lying, which\nis why I put in that \"perhaps.\" The best candidate for his lying is\nhis account to Dan of the coldhouse prank, which I discussed in my\nearlier post." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "My apologies; I should have said \"lying in his account,\" as opposed to\nlying to one or more of the people in his account. This makes a great\ndeal of difference." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 3, "text": "But I'm skeptical that \"recreating\" can be\nthe master key to building \"a coherent and consistent model,\" as you\nseem to be suggesting, at least one which is grounded in the text." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "Okay, here's a bogey model." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "[...model postponed...]" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "That's why I put in the clause about being grounded in the text. I\ndon't think that this model is, although I've discussed this before and\nI don't expect you to agree with me." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Point by point." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "Weer is dead, to begin with. " }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "I hope I don't have to show that this is grounded? Perhaps not proven, \nbut certainly grounded." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": " In the grave " }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "I demur on \"in the grave.\" The \"freed by the fall of the tree\" bit can\nbe interpreted as saying he is no longer in the grave; however, I did\nnot mean it as physical location." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": " he is undergoing a process by\nwhich he goes, or is led, through his life," }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "That he is in some sense going through his life is clear. \"Is led\" is\nmore questionable; it leads back to my speculation on the doctors, and\npossibly others, as psychopomps. Certainly the words and actions of the\ndoctors seem to spark many of Weer's trips down memory lane; the only\nreal speculation here is that it is done deliberately." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": " given the opportunity to\nchange his mind (a la the Chinese Pillow; but cf also \"Its a Wonderful\nLife\"... H'mm, this paragraph is taking on a holiday theme...), \"repent\nof\" his former decisions, and so achieve Peace." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Grounded, to begin with, in the title. A reading that doesn't make sense\nof the title is (imo) not particularly interesting. As for \"changing his\nmind,\" I don't necessarily mean that he gets to change what actually \nhappened, but at least he has the opportunity -- whether or not he takes\nit -- to reevaluate his attitude toward it: thus the \"repentance\" angle. \n(I am still working with variations on the \"purgatory\" model, if that \nwasn't clear.) " }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "Two additional speculations help:\n1. This may be an iterative process, and we may be seeing only one\n loop (or part of one)" }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "This obviously is pure speculation; primarily it's a way of accounting \nfor the semicoherent opening and closing, but I can't really call it\n\"grounded\" in the text." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "2. Weer may not be (almost certainly is not) aware of the nature of\n the process." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Grounding by negatives: granting per argumentam the major premise, there \nis nothing in the text that would suggest that Weer _is_ aware of it." } ] }, { "message_id": "", "from": { "name": "William Ansley", "address": "wansley at warwick.net" }, "date": "2000-12-08T00:03:52+00:00", "subject": "Re: (urth) Grounded in the text?", "in_reply_to": "", "reply_link": "subject", "blocks": [ { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "At 1:42 PM -0800 12/6/00, Dan'l Danehy-Oakes wrote:\nAdam Stephanides wrote:" }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "..." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": " > I think one key to the whole shebang is the question of whom\n > Weer [thinks he] is writing to; at one point he addresses his readers\n > as \"ladies.\" (Olivia?)" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": " > If you're referring to the spot on p. 14 of the Harper & Row edition\n (\"Ladies, this was not what I wanted\"), Weer is referring here not to\n his readers, but to the women at Weer's birthday party, who apparently\n have mentally intruded on his visit to Van Ness.\n\nThat is the passage (it's on p13 of my Berkley ed'n), but is in a\nparagraph set off by slugs, between a \"birthday party\" passage and\na \"Doctor Van Ness's office\" passage. The ladies at the party have\njust been discussing the falsification of the Indian treaty.\n\nThe paragraph in full:\n\nOne moment, please. Let me stand and walk to the window;\nlet me put this broken elm branch -- shaped as though it\nwere meant to be the antler of a wooden deer, such a deer\nas might be found, possibly, under one of the largest\noutdoor Christmas trees -- upon the fire. Ladies, this\nwas not what I wanted. Ladies, I wish to know only if in\nmy condition I should exercise or remain still; because\nif the answer is that I must exercise I will go looking\nfor my scout knife.\n\nNow, I could be wrong, but it seems to me pretty darned clear that\nthis is Weer in the porch of his memory-house, addressing -- well,\nthree possibilities.\n\n1. He is addressing his hypothetical readers.\n2. He is addressing the ladies (Sherry, the nurse, etc.) in the\n doctor's office.\n3. He is addressing the ladies at the party.\n\nBut of these three, only the first is fully coherent; the third\ninvolves a level of incoherency where he simply cannot distinguish\nbetween the porch and the party. I suppose this is no worse than a\nmarginal reading, but I see no special value in a marginal reading\nwhen a fully coherent one is available. (Unless, of course, you\nwant to argue for \"all of the above\" and maybe others.)" }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "I can't let this pass without comment. I am sure I won't change your \nmind Dan'l, but as far as I am concerned, the only reasonable choice \nfrom your list of who Weer could be addressing when he says \"ladies\" \nin the passage you quote above is number 3. I really have no idea \nwhat you mean when you say choice number 1 is the most 'coherent.'\n\nWe have a book written by a dead man who doesn't know he is dead, and \nwho seems to believe that he can send his mind back into the past to \nearlier parts of his life and yet doesn't seem to think that this is \nat all unusual. (Here I a describing what it seems to me that Weer \nbelieves is happening to him rather than what is \"really\" happening \nto him, assuming that what is really happening in the context of \n_Peace_ can ever be determined.) When he does send his mind back into \nthe past, it has a strong tendency to bounce around, as the past \nevents he encounters recall other past events (\"Billy Pilgrim has \ncome unstuck in time.\") Various parts of what seems to be the past \nblend together with each other and also with what seems to be the \npresent. I am not sure using coherency as the basis for analysis make \nsense.\n\n From the beginning of the book to the passage you quote, Weer's \"time \ntravels\" seem to go like this. (I have the Orb paperback edition of \n_Peace_ handy and I will have to use page numbers from it. The \npassage you quote above from page 13 of the Berkley edition spans \npages 13 and 14 in the Orb edition.)\n\nPage Time/Place\n---- ----------\n1 Weer's house in the present\n3 Dr. Van Ness's waiting room (Weer is about 40-45?)\n4 Weer's childhood home at the time of his 5th birthday party\n6-7 Weer returns to his house in the present\n8 Back to Weer's 5th birthday\n10 Weer's childhood home at some unspecified time in the kitchen\n listening to Hannah\n12 Dr. Van Ness's office, seemingly at the same time as on p. 3\n13 Back to the birthday party\n13-14 The quoted passage in Weer's house, back in the present\n\nI have not done justice to the intricate structure of this first \nbrief part of the book. There are two or three short passages I have \nleft out where Weer's attention returns to the \"present,\" as if he is \njust reminiscing about his past. But the idea that we are just \nreading reminiscences seems to be contradicted when the Weer in the \npast talks as if he is a visitor from the future.\n\nBut, leaving all this aside, I think there is textual evidence that \nWeer is addressing the ladies at his fifth birthday party. On p. 5 we \nsee this: \"There is a white Pekinese as big as a spaniel at her feet, \nand it snarls when anyone comes too near. (Laugh, ladies, but \nMing-Sno will bite.)\" It is not clear who made this remark (perhaps \nWeer is recalling something his Aunt Olivia said), but it is \nobviously addressed to the ladies at Weer's 5th birthday party. It \nseems clear to me that when Were echoes the word \"ladies\" later he is \nreferring to the same group of people.\n\nWhen Weer does address his readers in _Peace_ he talks directly to \nus, most of the time implicitly, but on p. 83, directly. \"(Have you \nnever thought as you read that months may lie between any pair of \nwords?)\" I find _Peace_ much more coherent if Weer always addresses \nhis readers consistently, rather than sometimes deciding to address \nthem in the third person and as if they are all female.\n\nYou say that my interpretation (and Adam's) \"involves a level of \nincoherency [on Weer's part] where he simply cannot distinguish \nbetween the porch and the party.\" Obviously, I disagree. In my view, \nWeer's mind has just returned from his 5th birthday party back to the \n\"present\" and he is addressing the people he has just (in effect) \nleft, quite as he or I (or perhaps even you) might make a remark to \nsomeone who has just left the room, even if we are sure he or she \ncannot hear us any longer.\n\nI am sure that this was a lengthy (and boring) exercise in futility, \nbut when I tell someone he is dead wrong, I like to try to explain \nwhy." }, { "kind": "sig", "depth": 0, "text": "William Ansley" } ] }, { "message_id": "", "from": { "name": "Adam Stephanides", "address": "adamsteph at earthlink.net" }, "date": "2000-12-08T11:17:27+00:00", "subject": "Re: (urth) Grounded in the text?", "in_reply_to": "", "reply_link": "subject", "blocks": [ { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "An excellent post; I was going to defend my position, but you do it\nbetter than I would have. There are just a couple of amendments I would\nmake." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "William Ansley wrote:\n\nAt 1:42 PM -0800 12/6/00, Dan'l Danehy-Oakes wrote:" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "Adam Stephanides wrote:" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": " > If you're referring to the spot on p. 14 of the Harper & Row edition\n (\"Ladies, this was not what I wanted\"), Weer is referring here not to\n his readers, but to the women at Weer's birthday party, who apparently\n have mentally intruded on his visit to Van Ness." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "[snip]" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "The paragraph in full:\n\n One moment, please. Let me stand and walk to the window;\n let me put this broken elm branch -- shaped as though it\n were meant to be the antler of a wooden deer, such a deer\n as might be found, possibly, under one of the largest\n outdoor Christmas trees -- upon the fire. Ladies, this\n was not what I wanted. Ladies, I wish to know only if in\n my condition I should exercise or remain still; because\n if the answer is that I must exercise I will go looking\n for my scout knife." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "[snip]" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "You say that my interpretation (and Adam's) \"involves a level of\nincoherency [on Weer's part] where he simply cannot distinguish\nbetween the porch and the party.\" Obviously, I disagree. In my view,\nWeer's mind has just returned from his 5th birthday party back to the\n\"present\" and he is addressing the people he has just (in effect)\nleft, quite as he or I (or perhaps even you) might make a remark to\nsomeone who has just left the room, even if we are sure he or she\ncannot hear us any longer." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "I would analyze it a bit differently. I think that when Weer's mind is\nin the \"past\" he remains aware of his \"present\" situation; this is how\nhe is able to move back and forth at will, here and on p. 12 of H & R\n(\"I stand, holding on to the mantel...\"). Conversely, in this\nparagraph, although his attention has turned to the \"present\" situation,\nhis mind is still simultaneously at the birthday party (and at Van\nNess's office!). So the \"ladies\" of the birthday party he is addressing\nare present, though\nin another compartment of his mind, so to speak. It's a small point,\nbut I think it's important to figure out, as best we can, what exactly\nis going on in the course of Weer's narration.\n\nIn the further interests of exactitude, an even smaller point:" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "But, leaving all this aside, I think there is textual evidence that\nWeer is addressing the ladies at his fifth birthday party. On p. 5 we\nsee this: \"There is a white Pekinese as big as a spaniel at her feet,\nand it snarls when anyone comes too near. (Laugh, ladies, but\nMing-Sno will bite.)\" It is not clear who made this remark (perhaps\nWeer is recalling something his Aunt Olivia said)" }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Could be, but I don't recall any other instances of Weer echoing another\nperson's remark without indicating he's doing so; and I don't see any\nreason why it shouldn't be an aside by the present-day Weer,\nrhetorically addressed to the \"ladies.\" Of course, this doesn't affect\nyour argument.\n\n--Adam" } ] }, { "message_id": "", "from": { "name": "William Ansley", "address": "wansley at warwick.net" }, "date": "2000-12-08T23:57:50+00:00", "subject": "Re: (urth) Grounded in the text?", "in_reply_to": "", "reply_link": "subject", "blocks": [ { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "At 11:17 AM -0800 12/8/00, Adam Stephanides wrote:\nAn excellent post; I was going to defend my position, but you do it\nbetter than I would have. There are just a couple of amendments I would\nmake." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Thank you, but I'm sure you would have done just as well, if not better." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "William Ansley wrote:" }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "[...]" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": " > You say that my interpretation (and Adam's) \"involves a level of\n incoherency [on Weer's part] where he simply cannot distinguish\n between the porch and the party.\" Obviously, I disagree. In my view,\n Weer's mind has just returned from his 5th birthday party back to the\n \"present\" and he is addressing the people he has just (in effect)" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": " left, quite as he or I (or perhaps even you) might make a remark to\n someone who has just left the room, even if we are sure he or she\n cannot hear us any longer." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "I would analyze it a bit differently. I think that when Weer's mind is\nin the \"past\" he remains aware of his \"present\" situation; this is how\nhe is able to move back and forth at will, here and on p. 12 of H & R\n(\"I stand, holding on to the mantel...\"). Conversely, in this\nparagraph, although his attention has turned to the \"present\" situation,\nhis mind is still simultaneously at the birthday party (and at Van\nNess's office!). So the \"ladies\" of the birthday party he is addressing\nare present, though\nin another compartment of his mind, so to speak. It's a small point,\nbut I think it's important to figure out, as best we can, what exactly\nis going on in the course of Weer's narration." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Very neat. This hypothesis is much better my \"Weer's mind as a single \npoint travelling through time\" idea, if only because it allows for a \nmuch neater explanation of all the sudden shifts in the text." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "In the further interests of exactitude, an even smaller point:" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": " But, leaving all this aside, I think there is textual evidence that\n Weer is addressing the ladies at his fifth birthday party. On p. 5 we\n see this: \"There is a white Pekinese as big as a spaniel at her feet,\n and it snarls when anyone comes too near. (Laugh, ladies, but\n Ming-Sno will bite.)\" It is not clear who made this remark (perhaps\n Weer is recalling something his Aunt Olivia said)" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "Could be, but I don't recall any other instances of Weer echoing another\nperson's remark without indicating he's doing so; and I don't see any\nreason why it shouldn't be an aside by the present-day Weer,\nrhetorically addressed to the \"ladies.\" Of course, this doesn't affect\nyour argument." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "You know, I actually have always read this parenthetical remark as \njust that, \"an aside by the present-day Weer, rhetorically addressed \nto the 'ladies.'\" But, I confused myself by thinking about it too \nmuch and offered a weak alternative.\n\nBut I did say \"perhaps.\"" }, { "kind": "sig", "depth": 0, "text": "William Ansley" } ] }, { "message_id": "", "from": { "name": "Adam Stephanides", "address": "adamsteph at earthlink.net" }, "date": "2000-12-09T10:42:52+00:00", "subject": "Re: (urth) Grounded in the text?", "in_reply_to": "", "reply_link": "subject", "blocks": [ { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "Dan'l Danehy-Oakes wrote:\n\nAdam Stephanides wrote:" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 4, "text": "But I'm skeptical that \"recreating\" can be\nthe master key to building \"a coherent and consistent model,\" as you\nseem to be suggesting, at least one which is grounded in the text." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 3, "text": "Okay, here's a bogey model." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "[...model postponed...]" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "That's why I put in the clause about being grounded in the text. I\ndon't think that this model is, although I've discussed this before and\nI don't expect you to agree with me." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "Point by point." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 3, "text": "Weer is dead, to begin with." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "I hope I don't have to show that this is grounded? Perhaps not proven,\nbut certainly grounded." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 3, "text": " he is undergoing a process by\nwhich he goes, or is led, through his life," }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "That he is in some sense going through his life is clear. \"Is led\" is\nmore questionable; it leads back to my speculation on the doctors, and\npossibly others, as psychopomps. Certainly the words and actions of the\ndoctors seem to spark many of Weer's trips down memory lane; the only\nreal speculation here is that it is done deliberately." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 3, "text": " given the opportunity to\nchange his mind (a la the Chinese Pillow; but cf also \"Its a Wonderful\nLife\"... H'mm, this paragraph is taking on a holiday theme...), \"repent\nof\" his former decisions, and so achieve Peace." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "Grounded, to begin with, in the title. A reading that doesn't make sense\nof the title is (imo) not particularly interesting. As for \"changing his\nmind,\" I don't necessarily mean that he gets to change what actually\nhappened, but at least he has the opportunity -- whether or not he takes\nit -- to reevaluate his attitude toward it: thus the \"repentance\" angle.\n(I am still working with variations on the \"purgatory\" model, if that\nwasn't clear.)" }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "I think we pretty much agree on what elements of your model are and are\nnot grounded in the text (I've snipped the ones you say are not). I\nagree Weer's death is grounded in the text; he is evidently going over\nhis life; and the title, combined with the ending, do make it reasonable\nto infer that Weer is seeking peace. I don't believe, however, that\nthey are grounds for inferring that \"peace\" is an achievable goal, or\nthat the way to reach it is through \"repentance.\"\n\nBut I don't think that these grounded elements, taken by themselves, are\nenough to constitute \"a coherent and consistent model.\" At any rate,\nthey are too general to be of much help in explaining the mysteries of\nWeer's present situation, which is what we want a model for.\n\n--Adam" } ] } ] }