This is an interesting piece, Barry. I guess the premise of projection might apply to the writings of Robin as well, yes?
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb <no_reply@...> wrote: > > Having written in creative contexts, during which I had to invent > characters and then "put myself inside their heads" to make them > believable, I've always wondered about those who feel that they can > "know" a writer from what they write. > > For example, I've heard supposedly knowledgeable critics call Stephen > King "sick" for writing some of his horror scenes, while completely > ignoring some of his more spiritual and uplifting work, such as the > noble quests and characters in, say, "The Talisman." Similarly I've seen > people describe William Peter Blatty as "obviously possessed by demons > and under the influence of Satan" for writing what others consider one > of the most Catholic (and thus religious) books ever written, "The > Exorcist." > > Having had this experience of creating characters or plotlines and then > immersing myself in them long enough to write about them in a way that > sounds realistic, I'm not convinced of people's claims to be able to > "know" any writer based on what he or she writes. I think that instead > people tend to *project* what they want to see onto a passage of > writing, and attribute to the writer emotions, thoughts, or qualities he > or she might not have had. Thus someone who already wishes to believe > that Maharishi is a Good Guy can read what he writes and see nothing but > Good Guyness there, while someone who is already convinced that he is a > charlatan can read the same passage and see nothing but charlatanry. > > I think people do this all the time...bring their preconceptions about a > writer into play and allow them to color what they read, and their > perceptions of what and who the writer is. For example, the other day I > read about a writing workshop in which the students were asked to read > the following quote from Gandhi, and comment on what they "saw" of the > author's psychological state and overall personality in it. Here...you > guys give it a try, too: > > "I can give vent to my inmost feelings only in the form of humble thanks > to Providence which called upon me and vouchsafed it to me...to rise to > be the leader of my people, so dear to me. Providence showed me the way > to free our people from the depths of its misery without bloodshed and > to lead it upward once again. Providence granted that I might fulfill my > life's task -- to raise my people out of the depths of defeat and to > liberate it from the bonds of the most outrageous dictate of all > times... I have regarded myself as called upon by Providence to serve my > own people alone and to deliver them from their frightful misery." > > The students went on and on about the qualities of the noble spiritual > leader they saw in this passage, and how perfectly it reflected Gandhi's > philosophy of non-violence and dedication to humanity. They compared the > style of this paragraph to other famous quotes of Gandhi's, and used > both sets of words to back up their perceptions of the writer as a noble > and religious man, nigh unto saintly in his dedication to his fellow > man. > > At the end of the exercise the professor revealed to the students that > the quote (with a few "spoiler" words removed) is from a 1939 speech > delivered to the Reichstag by Adolf Hitler. >
