re Re: NP: Twain, Part One re Re: NP: Twain, Part One

[Bandwraith at aol.com]

Good questions and comments, all, and I will try to be a little
more specific later, when I'm not so pressed for time (What... 
does that 'mean'?"). For now, I will simply admit to being
purposively general. In the meantime, fire away!


 From: Terrance <lycidas2 at earthlink.net>


[[ Not sure what you mean by exploitative here, but you seem to be implying
 that P makes use of the history of the Herero selfishly or unethically.
 Is that what you are saying? Or is it that P exploits the Herero as they
 were exploited as "labor"? Or what? 


 I suspect that you have not made yourself clear here. Could you please
 re-state this? 
 Also, I can understand why you may not want to include any P statements,
 letters, so on, on this topic, but I can't understand why we can't get
 examples from the texts. Why all these generalizations w/o a single
 passage from any of the novels? 

 An example I would be willing to discuss is from Mondaugan's Story in
 the novel V., Part III, close to the end of Part III, 

 the pages I have are 289-291, but your copy is probably different, 

 anyway, it is a very long sentence that ends the section. 

 It begins 

 "If it were a parable (which he doubted) it probably went to illustrate
 the progress...fog." 


 BTW, I agree that George and Gersh are putting on quite a show for our
 boys. That being said I can't believe that Gersh's is serious about
 George wanting him to invest in Swamp land. 

 Also, no doubt that George's use of the verb "Be" is BT.]]