In the flesh
CO10PI wrote: When I say I'm not eclectic, I mean that I have a clear and neatly defined view of life and facts which makes my principles clear and straight, no matter if they don't suit me. I'm none of the kind that selects from here and there. When I use such expresions as "open minded" I intend to say just the opposite to being eclectic: I explore, I chose whatever, as far as my age allows me to do, and go for it: what you call eclecticism is but young people's curiosity. I'd be dead if I wouldn't eclectisize a little! Eclecticism is a tolerable tendency in someone my age. Otherwise, I'd be an oldie, though I like things pure and defined, not horrible mixtures of who knows what. But it might just be a matter of the language used. My mother tongue, as you well know, is not English, so you can't expect me to be as accurate using it as I might be using mine. I will never be able to express myself as deeeply in English as I would in my own language, ¿no te pasa a tí lo mismo, merluzo?. But if it's enough for you, it's ok with me, though I often miss a part of the message. Of course, I don't like all of Polanski, and here comes the concept "good". Obviously, when I say good I mean my own concept for good, which might be coincident with that of many others, but has got it's foundations in my readings, studies, travels and ways of looking at things. That is exactly why I don't like making lists, and I'm not doing so any more. The moment you have a picture of something the others like, you tend to focalize anything through that vision of yours, instead of understanding it's your own vision that's being projected through the picture. Therefore, I'd rather you told me why do you like what you like and why do you think we've got so many things in common, instead of having me write useless lists, that by the way are always an amputation of my reality. Have you read Tanizaki's "Éloge de l'ombre"? It's very short and may reveal a lot more of what I think than I could show myself. Of course you want to re-read Proust! But what is that new translation? There are some exeptions to "the Russians": "Crimen y castigo", "The Mother" and "The Karamazov Brothers". They are not easy, but must be read, don't you think? Gogol is a bore to me. I haven't had yet the presence of mind to read the U. I've read "Dubliners", and "A Portrait of the Artist as a Young Man". One of my greatest passions, though, is Heinrich Böll in all his forms. I started when I was fourteen by reading "The Lost Honour of Katarina Blum", and never have been able to stop since then. And the same with Stevenson, Twain, Kipling, I. Calvino and García Márquez. Most of their works I've read more than twice. Have you tried the Southamericans? Ahora ya me he cansado de este petardo, y de escribir en inglés. Motion is something that has always attracted me: futurism had a fascinating vision of motion, very Italian connected. You sound like Forrest Gump when talking about your passion. I think now I understand why you walk so fast! De acuerdo en lo de que parecemos dos lenguados, más lenguado tú que yo, so what??? We'll go on smashing our lives in the next chapter. Bye, bye, happiness. De: "David Still"
> open minded has to do with be willing to look and explore many things; eclectic, by contrast, suggest a taste that is willing to take from, explore many different visions, departments, areas, ages, etc but insists always on applying a sense of sorting out that which is good from that which is mere trash. You like "good" but all people like good; depends on what is good for each person, no, though your likings in film and directors, Polanski excepted, strikes me as nice, well gathered (and yes eclectic)... Realm of the Senses was a Japanese film I much liked; and Tanzazi's novels I cherish (he rings a bell in me), and so I guess that in most lit I too am eclectic, though of late I don't ever think I could reread the Russians, except Gogol and Turgenev...ugh to Dost. and I haven't the patience fo Tolstoy. But I would like to read the new trans of Proust, though it has not got the best reviews; and I do intend to reread (4th time) Joyce's U. French? after Proust, Flaubert and a thumbs down pretty much for Stendhal at this point in my life. > Running: I love to run and have done this a number of years including NY Marathon and many half marathons...am readingWhy We Run, by Heinrich (Bernd first name) a fascinating book by a strange man who runs ultra marathongs (over 50 miles) and is biologist and zoologist--he explores locomotion in animals to see how it connects to human running, which he believes to be an art form and a grand simplification of life... very odd background on the author too. > we are soul mates or sole mates or something... but clearly have something in common on tastes.