They had differant motives...

Twain realized that the power of the pen was quite mighty indeed and could be used for both entertainment and educataion, Wharton was more interested in the entertainment portion - or just the story. Ethan Frome ends in a suprise, but it really has no moral. Neverthelesss it is a masterpiece of literature because it swamps the reader with emotion and empathy.

Any lessons there, not really. Great Writing, you bet.

Regards, Aaron Ezis, American Literary Classics - A Chapter A Day Publisher

---

---

Since I haven't read Ethan Frome, I can't speak to it. Having read "The Age of Innocence", I will say it speaks ill of her to say she was focused on the entertainment or story as opposed to education. She spends more time describing the furniture, flowers, paintings, horse-carriages... everything BUT the characters. I know and care more about Twain's protagonists in 4 chapters than I did Wharton's in her entire book.

Chris

---

---

To: CMayes
Subject: Re: Wharton & Twain
Send reply to: arezis@mindport.net
Date sent: Sat, 10 May 1997 09:33:12 -0500

You think you know more about Twains protaganist, things are not always what they seem...

Ethan Frome is a masterpiece because the characters - (Sorry folks, I didn't read the Age of Innocence), and your deep deep empathy for each of their situations.

As far as endless decription of the plainer things, I've heard this same complaint about Melville, Conrad, Hawthorne, and others. When there is no television to lend a hand description was craved.

Anyone wanna back me up on this?

I have to admit _The Age of Innocence_ was a blacksheep on this page, all the others are undisputed classics, and had Frome been Public Domain it would have been representational of Wharton, and even Chris might have enjoyed it.

Regards, Aaron Ezis,

---

---

From: arezis@mindport.net
Date sent: Sat, 10 May 1997 21:35:00, -0500
To: Chris
Subject: Re: Wharton & Twain

>As far as endless discription of the plainer things, I've heard this same
>complaint about Melville, Conrad, Hawthorne, and others. When there is no
>television to lend a hand description was craved.

I have no problem with description of plainer things as long as similar care is taken describing the characters. Wharton's _The Age of Innocence_ was badly lacking in that regard in my opinion.

>I have to admit _The Age of Innocence_ was a blacksheep on this page, all
>the others are undisputed classics, and had Frome been Public Domain
>it would have been representational of Wharton, and even Chris might have
>enjoyed it.

Aaron, please don't mistake criticism of Wharton's (or any other author's) work as personal criticism of you for posting that work. I think what you're doing here with American Literary Classics is great.

Chris

---

---

From: arezis@mindport.net
To: CMayes
Subject: Misunderstanding:)
Send reply to: arezis@mindport.net
Date sent: Sat, 10 May 1997 23:23:02 -0500

> Aaron, please don't mistake criticism of Wharton's (or any other
> author's) work as personal criticism of you for posting that work. I
> think what you're doing here with American Literary Classics is great.
>
> Chris

Well I am a Monk and I don't Judge others for anything. I didn't take your comments on Wharton personally. (If I took comments personally I'd drive myself insane).

One woman had the Gall to write to me and say that my page was Male Dominated - The current selection was by a women, two other books of the ten at the time were by women, and Women were the central Charaters in 5 of the 10...

That's the nonsensicle criticism I feel is unfair.

Anything goes on the discussion pages! (Read the Last of the Mohicans thread for proof)... That guy got what for becuase his criticism was repititious and really not adding anything but PC BS to the discussion.

When I refered to you in my message it was so that other readers would know that I was refering to your comment on Wharton.

If I didn't the thread might have been confusing. Most people read and don't participate and I'd hate to loose someone with something to add to the page.

No Quarter asked no quarter given, I want lively debate in the threads.

Sure I'll play devils advocate every once in a while but not to offend anyone, just to add to the discussion a differant perspective.

AOI probably was boring... Don't know it's the only book in the Library on ALC I have not read...

But Ethan Frome is one of my all time favorites and I figured since it was not available AOI was probably a decent choice.

If you get a chance rent the movie with Liam Neisson and Patricia Arquette "Ethan Frome"... Unbelivably great movie..

The book however was heartwrenching and the characters and symbols were transcendent of the face value, the work of an older more mature Wharton? Probably.

Any way I hope we understand each other better, if you'd like me to take the referal to you out I will.

Regards, Aaron Ezis,

---

---

Date sent: Mon, 12 May 1997 17:01:25 -0600
From: Roberta
Organization: Roy High School
To: arezis@mindport.net
Subject: Wharton v. Twain: I like 'em both

It's true that my first reading of _Frome_, when I was a mere 18 years old, did very little for me. Of course, Twain is always good and I enjoyed _Prince_ then, as I do now. However, I believe I can make a good case for Wharton's literary talents and entertainment value. I read _Frome_ again in my 40s. This time I was touched by the characters in the story--and the tragedies that accompanied them because of their choices and circumstances. The geranium pot, the broken dish (I think it's a dish), and several other items said more than a little as symbols.

---

---

RESPOND VIA EMAIL
BACK TO READERS DICUSSION PAGE
Back to American Literary Classics - A Chapter A Day

---

---