somewhat on topic and obSalinger: today in my later British Romantics class I compared Byron's Childe Harold to Holden Caulfield. the prof. didn't know what the hell i meant so i had to go into all this disillusionment with the present state and idyllic journey that puts the traveller right back where he started but oh so much the better for the travelling. it was all very much off the top of my head (or out of my ass, depending on your level of propriety) and i'm getting the feeling i've botched it terribly here. it may be enough to note the prof eventually understood and told me never to bring up american lit in his class again. and we all had a good laugh and burrowed through the rest of the second canto (i mean of canto the second)...matt (stevenson, who will henceforth sign his posts as yahweh due to the rising population of "matt"s on the list) On Tue, 09 Feb 1999 17:15:38 -0500 (EST) jrovira@juno.com (blah b b blah) wrote: >Thank GOD Wordsworth wasn't the only English Romantic Poet :) I always >thought he was Up to Here in Feces. I much prefer Blake -- more honest, >more real, more thoughtful, plenty of ideas without idealism. > >Blake also provides a good paradigm for the growth out of innocence. >While we do pass through experience (disillusionment, selfishness, etc) >we do not have to stay there. We can enter into the Old John state, >where we attain an informed innocence once again. If you want to give >Wordsworth some credibility, I would say we pass out of a "body-centered" >experience into something less "physically" passionate into something >more thoughtful, directed, and "effectively" passionate. > >In short, we know what we want, value, and how to serve those ends in the >real world. We accept limitations and work within them; and when we're >really experienced, we use them to our advantage. In short, we learn how >to win and how not to defeat ourselves. > >At least, we CAN know :) We can also stay Stupid our entire lives... > >Jim > >