4 ms·

This story seems to suffer from Yoda Syndrome, the problem which occurs in all stories where a character is supposed to be wiser than the author. The "wisdom"

by hugh3 17y ago

This story seems to suffer from Yoda Syndrome, the problem which occurs in all stories where a character is supposed to be wiser than the author. The "wisdom" which they spout always comes across as kinda trite and sophomoric. I don't think there's any way around it.

deleted 17y ago
[deleted]
bdr 17y ago
Wiser than the author? Where do you get that from? Also, while I agree that the piece is more philosophical than literary, it's more than just an argument for the younger man's perspective. After all, if the argument were irrefutable, the banker, who knows everything that we know, would have adopted the younger man's perspective. Instead, he hides the papers in the safe. Why? And in what other ways do people "put the papers in the safe" so to speak?
- hugh3 17y ago
  Perhaps my reading of the letter was excessively influenced by what I expected to happen, but I thought the story was more literary than philosophical. I expected the piece to end with the young man achieving so much enlightenment from his studies that he no longer needed the money, and by the time I got to the letter I was disappointed by its contents. I suppose it's equally possible to read the letter as showing that the young man is thinks he's become wise but hasn't really. I think the story would be enhanced if we were never shown what was in the letter. The banker goes to the cell and finds the man missing and the letter in his place, reads the letter and goes and locks it in his safe. I think that would be a better ending, but then again there's probably a reason why Chekhov is considered a great writer and I'm not.
  - DrSprout 17y ago
    You're an atheist, Checkov was not. For the theist the giving up earthly wealth ensures eternal bliss.
vsync 17y ago
Reminds me of the montage of Jamal's writing in Finding Forrester. I saw it commented on in a few places as an obvious attempt to imply such sublime writing as the writers couldn't actually write.

by hugh3 17y ago

deleted 17y ago

[deleted]

bdr 17y ago

Wiser than the author? Where do you get that from? Also, while I agree that the piece is more philosophical than literary, it's more than just an argument for the younger man's perspective. After all, if the argument were irrefutable, the banker, who knows everything that we know, would have adopted the younger man's perspective. Instead, he hides the papers in the safe. Why? And in what other ways do people "put the papers in the safe" so to speak?

hugh3 17y ago
Perhaps my reading of the letter was excessively influenced by what I expected to happen, but I thought the story was more literary than philosophical. I expected the piece to end with the young man achieving so much enlightenment from his studies that he no longer needed the money, and by the time I got to the letter I was disappointed by its contents. I suppose it's equally possible to read the letter as showing that the young man is thinks he's become wise but hasn't really. I think the story would be enhanced if we were never shown what was in the letter. The banker goes to the cell and finds the man missing and the letter in his place, reads the letter and goes and locks it in his safe. I think that would be a better ending, but then again there's probably a reason why Chekhov is considered a great writer and I'm not.
- DrSprout 17y ago
  You're an atheist, Checkov was not. For the theist the giving up earthly wealth ensures eternal bliss.

vsync 17y ago

Reminds me of the montage of Jamal's writing in Finding Forrester. I saw it commented on in a few places as an obvious attempt to imply such sublime writing as the writers couldn't actually write.