Here's something you might be interested in.
Ask a Hipster — Advice you didn't know you needed
Big Screen — Movie commentary
Blurt — Music's inside track
Booze News — San Diego spirits
Classical Music — Immortal beauty
Classifieds — Free and easy
Cover Stories — Front-page features
Drinks All Around — Bartenders' drink recipes
Excerpts — Literary and spiritual excerpts
Feast! — Food & drink reviews
Feature Stories — Local news & stories
Fishing Report — What’s getting hooked from ship and shore
From the Archives — Spotlight on the past
Golden Dreams — Talk of the town
The Gonzo Report — Making the musical scene, or at least reporting from it
Letters — Our inbox
Movies@Home — Local movie buffs share favorites
Movie Reviews — Our critics' picks and pans
Musician Interviews — Up close with local artists
Neighborhood News from Stringers — Hyperlocal news
News Ticker — News & politics
Obermeyer — San Diego politics illustrated
Outdoors — Weekly changes in flora and fauna
Overheard in San Diego — Eavesdropping illustrated
Poetry — The old and the new
Reader Travel — Travel section built by travelers
Reading — The hunt for intellectuals
Roam-O-Rama — SoCal's best hiking/biking trails
San Diego Beer — Inside San Diego suds
SD on the QT — Almost factual news
Sheep and Goats — Places of worship
Special Issues — The best of
Street Style — San Diego streets have style
Surf Diego — Real stories from those braving the waves
Theater — On stage in San Diego this week
Tin Fork — Silver spoon alternative
Under the Radar — Matt Potter's undercover work
Unforgettable — Long-ago San Diego
Unreal Estate — San Diego's priciest pads
Your Week — Daily event picks
Robert Louis Stevenson vs. Henry James on childhood
Signifying, and standing for it
There are those authors who mean a lot to me because of how much they mean. I mean, how much they represent, signify, stand for, as separate from what they wrote. And they go on representing, signifying, and standing for it just as well when left on the shelf, unread. Pope. Flaubert. Henry James. Unamuno. It takes only a sentence, a paragraph, a page of James to evoke, as if by incantation, the atmosphere of the cathedral.
But "favorite" would demand a degree of warmth, a personal attraction, an ap-proachability without feelings of inadequacy. For me, that seems to require somebody whom Edmund Wilson would decline to recognize as quite "first-rate," somebody who would apply the utmost artfulness, utmost refinement, utmost elegance to subject-matter most people would consider not worth the bother.
Somebody like Stevenson. Not — or not mainly — the Stevenson who most appealed to children's illustrators and to Hollywood. Not even the one who, with Jekyll and Hyde, achieved that supremely elusive and unwillable goal: created a myth. But the Stevenson of Prince Otto, The Wrecker, The New Arabian Nights, The Dynamiter, The Master of Ballantrae, Will o' the Mill, and the essays "A Humble Remonstrance," "A Penny Plain and Twopence Coloured," "The Lantern-Bearers," "Child's Play."
Nobody had a firmer grasp on the childishness of the artist, the artisticness of the child. Nobody believed more devoutly in make-believe. (When Henry James explained his alienation from Treasure Island in the terms, "I have been a child, but I have never been on a quest for buried treasure," Stevenson responded, "If he has never been on a quest for buried treasure, it can be demonstrated that he has never been a child." And from that standpoint, Stevenson's sickliness is a more illuminating biographical fact than his globe-trotting.) Nobody, for all his apparent neglect of sex and psychology and other adult currencies, had a stronger sense of the hidden and the unknown. Nobody, for all his reputation as a teller of simple tales, told them in so exquisite a style. Nobody, to me, represents, signifies, or stands for so much so underbearingly.
Here's something you might be interested in.
Robert Louis Stevenson vs. Henry James on childhood
Signifying, and standing for it
Robert Louis Stevenson vs. Henry James on childhood
Signifying, and standing for it
There are those authors who mean a lot to me because of how much they mean. I mean, how much they represent, signify, stand for, as separate from what they wrote. And they go on representing, signifying, and standing for it just as well when left on the shelf, unread. Pope. Flaubert. Henry James. Unamuno. It takes only a sentence, a paragraph, a page of James to evoke, as if by incantation, the atmosphere of the cathedral.
But "favorite" would demand a degree of warmth, a personal attraction, an ap-proachability without feelings of inadequacy. For me, that seems to require somebody whom Edmund Wilson would decline to recognize as quite "first-rate," somebody who would apply the utmost artfulness, utmost refinement, utmost elegance to subject-matter most people would consider not worth the bother.
Somebody like Stevenson. Not — or not mainly — the Stevenson who most appealed to children's illustrators and to Hollywood. Not even the one who, with Jekyll and Hyde, achieved that supremely elusive and unwillable goal: created a myth. But the Stevenson of Prince Otto, The Wrecker, The New Arabian Nights, The Dynamiter, The Master of Ballantrae, Will o' the Mill, and the essays "A Humble Remonstrance," "A Penny Plain and Twopence Coloured," "The Lantern-Bearers," "Child's Play."
Nobody had a firmer grasp on the childishness of the artist, the artisticness of the child. Nobody believed more devoutly in make-believe. (When Henry James explained his alienation from Treasure Island in the terms, "I have been a child, but I have never been on a quest for buried treasure," Stevenson responded, "If he has never been on a quest for buried treasure, it can be demonstrated that he has never been a child." And from that standpoint, Stevenson's sickliness is a more illuminating biographical fact than his globe-trotting.) Nobody, for all his apparent neglect of sex and psychology and other adult currencies, had a stronger sense of the hidden and the unknown. Nobody, for all his reputation as a teller of simple tales, told them in so exquisite a style. Nobody, to me, represents, signifies, or stands for so much so underbearingly.
Comments