Don't know ... a fictional piece of writing is hardly
evidence of a person's thoughts on a topic. It can be.
Reminds me of a an article on literature and symbology that
was in Harpers Magazine a few years ago and featured some
comments from Amy Tan. In one of her stories she writes about
a moon rising. During a convention a young lady caught her
ear and went on to tell Ms. Tan about her dissertation based
on her work and her analysis of how the moon rising reflected
the empowerment a female or the female characters were
striving for and slowly obtaining ... she went on and on
about her dissertation built all around this symbology that
Ms. Tan has used, etc.
Ms. Tan tells us she politely nodded as the young lady went
on and then let us know in the article ... it was just a moon
rising.
The interpretation of the symbology within that simple moon
rising is still legit and may relate to Jung's concepts of a
collective unconscious where Ms. Tan wrote unknowing of
universal archetypical image that contains the meaning the
young woman found in it. However, when it comes to using the
words of an author as evidence that they believe such and
such. I think we go to far at that point. Is Harris a
cannibal and serial killer or support cannibalism and serial
killers by writing about them? I should hope not. Was Jim
Thompson a sociopath himself? Applying the words an author
sews together to tell a story to a belief system will at
times be correct ... there's no doubt in my mind for example
that Andrew Vachss really doesn't like child abusers for
example. But that's a proven fact based upon his life outside
the jacket covers of his writing. Some of George Pelecanos's
heroes are drunks and drug abusers ... are we supposed to
assume that he believes in and supports heavy drinking and
drug use? He can answer for himself in this case, but until
he does I'll doubt it.
Could "The Black Mass of Brother Springer" be Willeford's
view on religion or the religion he experienced? Sure ... but
in the end does it even matter?
volente Deo,
Anthony Dauer Alexandria, Virginia
"... down these mean streets a man must go
who is not himself mean, who is neither
tarnished or afraid."
--Raymond
Chandler (1888-1959)
Hardboiled
http://www.adau.net/judas_ezine/
> -----Original Message-----
>
michaelschong@canada.com
> Sent: Wednesday, January 31, 2001 6:34 PM
>
> Spoil.
>
> Springer, an accountant, writes and sells a novel.
He quits his
> job to become a full-time writer and finds he cannot
sell another
> word. Through the classifieds, he finds a monastery
for sale
> which he thinks might make for a good story. After
travelling
> there, he finds a lone retired sergeant who has
wandered in
> himself and took control. The monastery it seems was
an
> experiment in race relations with the purpose of
training the
> clergy for a African American fundamentalist
denomination.
> Springer becomes a man of the cloth with his own
African American
> congregation. His writer ability allows him to craft
moving
> sermons. His organizational skills help him arrange
a
> segregation boycott. Springer's lust causes him to
seduce and
> run off with his deacon's young wife. Throughout the
story,
> Springer seems less a man of God than a man of
necessity. His
> faith seemed non existent.
>
> In the end, Springer buys a Brooks Brother suit and
throws away
> his preacher outfit into a trashcan on Madison
Avenue.
>
> How do you think Willeford felt about organized
religion?
-- # To unsubscribe from the regular list, say "unsubscribe rara-avis" to # majordomo@icomm.ca. This will not work for the digest version. # The web pages for the list are at http://www.miskatonic.org/rara-avis/ .
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : 31 Jan 2001 EST