Percy-L: Literary, Religious, Scientific, and Philosophical Discussion of Walker Percy

["Parlin, Steven" <PARLINS AT culver.org>]

Title: Message

Dear RP

 

I'm not sure "totally" doesn't fit (though perhaps it's fruitless to speculate about WP's thoughts). In "something to displease both sides", Percy never wavered on the (total) wrongness of killing unborn children. It's insanity and "totally", not partly, wrong. He was merely pointing out the intellectual myopia that exists on both sides of the political quagmire --and there is a lot of it. But, you're probably right that Percy would have surprised and delighted and shocked with his comments.

 

Two very good friends of mine are homosexual, one is in his late 60's and I speak with him regularly about these sorts of things. He knows (and unfortunately has "known") a lot of homosexuals. I can tell you there is hardly consensus among the homosexuals about what this agenda is really about. 

 

"Truth of gay love as a personal bond"? Hmm.... I love my best friend (since kinder) probably more than I love anyone in the world, but our "personal bond" is hardly a marriage, and I hardly want to be sexual with him. But, even more to the point...what of my love for my father?  Love is not really a part of this debate.

 

The truth is, again citing my friend, homosexual "bonds" are hardly about love and committment and the like. It's mostly about sexual appetite and gratification.

 

Society's need to accept this? Society needs to accept homosexuals, but not homosexuality.

 

Steve

-----Original Message-----
From: Robert_Pauley AT oxy.com [mailto:Robert_Pauley AT oxy.com]
Sent: Tuesday, August 12, 2003 7:08 PM
To: percy-l AT lists.ibiblio.org
Subject: RE: [percy-l] gay marriage

I don't think "totally" is the right adverb for any Walker Percy position. He was too intellectually supple. Remember his piece on abortion in the New York Times -- ... "Something to displease both sides." I believe he would have found a way to deconstruct the moral and semantic choplogic of "gay marriage" while allowing for the truth of gay love as a personal bond, and of society's need to accept this, short of formal social or religious sanctification. He would, again, have displeased both sides.  

 

Best, RP  

-----Original Message-----
From: percy-l-bounces AT lists.ibiblio.org [mailto:percy-l-bounces AT lists.ibiblio.org] On Behalf Of James Piat
Sent: Tuesday, August 12, 2003 4:59 PM
To: Percy-L: Literary and Philosophical Discussion
Subject: Re: [percy-l] gay marriage

Dear Phil,

 

I think we are all very much products of our circumstances  -- and tend to get more conservative as we age. Of his writings I like Percy's essays the most, and The Movie Goer more than The Thanatos Syndrome.  I'm not so sure Percy would be totally against gay marriage were he around today.  Times change; people change. 

 

Regards from Atlanta

Jim

I think Percy would be totally against gay marriage. But that's why I'm glad I don't walk around wearing a "WWPD?" wrist band. I think he was definitely a product of his time and place, and his later novels particularly illustrate his out-of-place feeling in the 1970's. And didn't it seem like he became more conservative and doctrinaire as he grew older? It's been a while since I've read Percy, but I remember The Thanatos Syndrome being a lot more "preachy" than his early novels...

 

Regards from Chapel Hill,

Phil