Slowly Learning

[LARSSON at VAX1.Mankato.MSUS.EDU]

Brian comments:
"The interesting logical quagmire here is that if you discount        
the SL intro, Lot 49 stays pretty pristine, but if you don't discount
the SL intro, you end up discounting Lot 49 slightly.  Something's
gotta give.  Always happens in self-referential criticism.  You pays
your money, and you takes your choice.  Since Lot 49 doesn't suffer
too badly even by his standards (it's still a better book than most,
and it's a hell of a lot better than I could possibly write) there's
not much harm in taking the SL criticisms seriously."


I also take the Intro. at face value, but I'm not sure that that means we
must needs agree with TRP'S assessment (even though I tend to agree with
much of it, in regard to both COL49 and the stories).

A comparative case in point: Ondaatje, author of THE ENGLISH PATIENT (which
I liked quite a bit as a book), apparently is a great fan of the movie
(which I've found reason to dislike quite a bit, especially by comparison
with the novel).  There are dozens of other examples out there, but they
point to the truism that an author is not always the best judge or his or
her own work.

Don Larsson, Mankato State U (MN)