Chris writes:
> William James is great -- I reread Varieties of
Religious Experience recently -- but he's not a writer
(maybe you were thinking of Henry?).
Not a fan of Henry despite his queerness. I did wrte a modern day adptation of "The Ambassadors," however, which I hope to produce one day. I bring the homosex to the fore.
> I really liked Naked Lunch and Queer, but
Burrough's later cut-ups stuff I thought was
pointless -- also a lot of the material Burroughs
probably intended as erotic just came across as gross,
since I'm heterosexual.
Could be. When I first read Burroughs as a teenager, I just connected with him totally. It was like he pulgged into my brain, my heart and my loins simultaneously and gave all three areas a huge jolt of electricity.
Interestingly, when I read Henry Miller I was just bored to tears. I thought: "If this is heterosex, I am glad I am on the other team." I may have had your block in reverse.
> All that anal mucous everywhere.
Now known as santorum.
> I tried getting into Pynchon, but it seemed too, "hey, man, it's
the 60s."
I was just dazzled by the feeling of an alternative history. The Chapter in "V." titled Mondaugen's Story had me crying by the end of it -- one of the few times I have cried when reading a book.
DeLillo is another story. I have tried all his novels and while I admire the prose, I just never feel compelled to keep reading. I like the ideas as well. Just something strikes me as being off.
Brian Dauth Queer Buddhist Resister