Taylor from Rockport on sun 10 jul 05
Mayor Mel please post this.
I've been asked by some off list to clarify my
contribution to the Leech/Abernathy thread. In respect to them, I will do
just that. Sorry if my glib reply failed to make the points I had hoped for it.
I was responding to Lee's response to Janet's position that Leach was a
prisoner of his upper class upbringing, a criticism that other have made of
Leach
Lee, when I quipped, "You're looking for the knuckle ball and she got you
with a straight ball righ down the middle," what I was saying was that while
you were expecting a down and away, you missed what she was pitching.
Believe it or not but "Culture is learned behavior that is not genetically
based" has absolutely nothing whatsoever to do with her point, and looks to
me like smoke and mirrors.
Let me restate: two views of the Leach/Abernathy exchange
a) This exchange shows that Leach did not understand
America (read American culture here). Lee, I can not intrepret your
position any other way. Please correct me and restate if I am amiss.
b) This exchange show that Leach was held firm, even
then, within his upper class mentality.
B really got me thinking, could it be that Abernathy felt as Janet does and
replied with two very powerful symbols of the American middle class? Could
Abernathy have been sticking it to Leache's upper crust? I duno. The
exchange is rather bazar (sp) to me. What posessed Leach to say that? What
the devil does writing with a paint brush have to do with anything other
than writing with a brush?
While I'm at it, let me call for a little clarification.
> I think in this context, Leach's criticism of
MacKenzie was
>primarily due to the fact that his feelings were hurt
because
>MacKenzie's work was more influenced by Hamada than
it was by his own
>work. This is understandable, I think. You can
read the exchange of
>letters between MacKenzie and Leach in the back of
the Kodansha book on
>MacKenzie.
Are you saying, Lee, that Leach didn't understand
American CULTURE not because he was British but
because he was mad at Abernathy? Why are you
mentioning MacK?
I'm also confused by this oversimplified view of the
Leach household.
>This isn't a "class
>difference", because any British servant in the
household would also
>have live in the same fish tank and the Leach family
did.
>
If you are arguing that no class difference could have existed between Leach
and his SERVANTS and so Leach was classless because both Leach and his
father's servants lived in the same fish tank, you better try again. Not
only can you not prove that the servants and the masters were influenced
alike but it is also maddness to argue agains a view using terms that
presuppose such a view point exists! The mere fact that the Leach household
had servants, compels me to consider class. How many of daddy's scullery
maids do you think accopmanied Leach to that first Raku party, Lee? How
many Japanese equivalents do you think were there?
> Both Leach and Yanagi lived in colonial
societies, which I
>suspect was more important than their position in
those societies.
And what, pray tell, is colonialism if not the
vainglorious cause of the upper class?
...
>But it probably was because he grew up in a colonial
culture, having
>been born in the colony of Hong Kong to a father who
was a colonial
>judge. This also isolated him from learning
language as a child in
>Japan because his family was surrounded by English
speaking servants and
>socialized in English speaking circles. They even
brought his nanny
>from Hong Kong to take care of him in Japan.
...
Looks to me like Lee and Janet are saying similar things, Janet's
observation participating in the no-longer-popular cause of the universal
class struggle.
Ah well now I say we teatable this.
Taylor in Rockport TX
wirerabbit.blogspot.com
| |
|
