> Marcus Smith, you wrote:
> >There is a "ghost chapter" in The Moviegoer and I wonder if the list might
> >want to discuss it. Chapter 5 ends on Ash Wednesday with Binx and Kate
> >parked near a playground in Gentilly. The "Epilogue" picks up over a year
> >later. Binx and Kate are now married and he is going to medical school.
> >In the sixth paragraph Binx says he is not inclined to discuss his search,
> >he declines to be "edifying" (alluding to SK), and he declares himself
> >ready for "asskicking."
> >
>
> The reference to "asskicking" is interesting in light of Percy's declaration
> to Caroline Gordon in a letter (quoted in the Tolson biography) that his
> writing was an exercise in "asskicking for Jesus' sake."
An interesting connection. But this seems to me to make more obvious the
issue of where Binx (or WP if you want to make the autobiographical
link--and I rather doubt that Binx = WP; if WP is "in" TM he is one of
the other characters, IMHO) acquires the authority to asskick anyone.
> >Clearly, this is a much different Binx than Binx at the end of Chapter 5.
> >Query: what happens inside Binx to produce Binx of the Epilogue? Why
> >does WP bypass any narrating of that transformation? Why does he require
> >the reader to "write" across that space?
> >
>
> As Percy often mentioned, Binx has undergone a conversion, whether the
> reader notices it, accepts it, or believes it. In Percy's view, he could
> not write about this because of his contention that the language of religion
> has been used up.
Fine. But is this mystery or mystification? Binx has undergone
"conversion"--but we can't discuss it. Trust me. The author's authority
cannot be challenged. All readers are children. This makes me
uncomfortable.
> >Finally, I think the transformation of Binx bears importantly on the
> >issue of essential versus created "self" that has been a recent topic on
> >the list.
>
> I agree. I think in the Epilogue we find the "essential Binx" coming
> through. He has moved past the futility of trying to create his "self" (my
> grandmother always told me not to say "hisself," but I suppose this is only
> an infraction audibly) based on consumerism, sexual exploits, or his place
> in the Bolling family and the New Orleans social structure.
>
Interesting. Is the "essential Binx" disclosed before the Epilogue? Does
the text in way support the notion that there is a real (authentic) Binx
underneath the sexual consumer Garden District white buck boy? I don't
see it prior to the Epilogue. Therefore, I think the argument that the
"essential" Binx emerges cannot be verified within the text of TM.
I want to say that I agree that Ted's reply is interesting and valuable.
And I'd like to agree. But I cannot for the reasons I propose above. And
I want to make it clear that The Moviegoer fascinates me. I think it is
an amzging book, but I'm not sure any of us has yet read it as it asks to
be read.
Marcus Smith
Department of English
Loyola University
New Orleans, Louisiana 70118
Office: 504-865-2481; Fax 504-866-1966