narratives

[William Karlin]

On Mon, 8 Sep 1997, Sojourner wrote:

> At 10:40 AM 9/8/97 -0500, Henry Musikar wrote:
> 
> >Connecting message, response, and an old, tattered thread: Has anyone 
> >read M&D stoned yet? I know many people read GR stoned for at least 
> >one reading....
> >
> 
> Translated as:  has anyone read M&D with an open, aware mind that
> can feel the light of the universal Beauty on the pages of the book?


   It almost could go without saying ('cept that I'm saying it) that one
doesn't *need* to be stoned (or what have you) to have an open, aware
mind.

  I think this also veers dangerously close to saying that foax who didn't
like M&D weren't being open-minded...that's not fair really.  But, it is
clear that some have been comparing it too much to GR.  I liked M&D; in
parts it was funny, moving, silly, profound, clever...maybe in some parts
it 'failed' -- it isn't perfect (but what work is?).  The one thing it
clearly is is subtle.  I read M&D slowly, going after the feeling in it...
it is a much more mature and nuanced novel than anything previous of TRP's
It didn't have any of those whacked-in-the-gut-with-a-sledgehammer moments
in GR.
  TRP, I feel, is lightening his paranoiac view...or at least poking a bit
of fun at it.  I think it was David who said the point is that "there's
something going on, but it ain't as simple as a world conspriacy" --
something more subtle...and more complex...something I am still mulling
over and will be for a while....

  TRP was after something else with GR.  Something that was overwhemling
for this then-college-freshman -- that book absolutely blew me away.  It
was a one-of-a-kind experience...one I'll be eternally grateful to my
intro-writing instructor for providing me.  But it was a *one-of-a-kind*
experience...I don't feel the same (sadly) now that I can go back and look
more, and it hasn't been something that I felt with any of TRP's other
works.  A-and lacking this feeling hasn't made me enjoy those other works
less, and hasn't made me dislike GR for no longer being that sledgehammer.
Hell, GR is so rich...I apprieciate for different reasons now.  Just as I
apprieciate all of TRP's works (and other authors' works) on their own
grounds.  I think M&D is yet another rich work, that I look forward to
rereading in the future.

  This is just my opinion of course: don't dismiss M&D so quickly...

cheers,

will