pector@ihuxw.UUCP (Scott W. Pector) (04/12/84)
<>
I received enough inquiries for the solutions that it is far easier for me
to post the answers. So, here is the paragraph again:
1 "It was a crisp and spicy morning in early October. The
2 lilacs and laburnums, lit with the glory-fires of autumn,
3 hung burning and flashing in the upper air, a fairy bridge
4 provided by kind Nature for the wingless wild things that
5 have their homes in the tree-tops and would visit together;
6 the larch and the pomegranate flung their purple and yellow
7 flames in brilliant broad splashes along the slanting sweep
8 of the woodland; the sensuous fragrance of innumerable
9 deciduous flowers rose upon the swooning atmosphere; far
10 in the empty sky a solitary esophagus slept upon
11 motionless wing; everywhere brooded stillness, serenity,
12 and the peace of God."
BONUS QUESTION: Which of Twain's books or stories, and where in it
(chapter, page, paragraph number, whatever, etc.),
did it come from?
The answer to the bonus question is: it came from the beginning of
chapter 4 in "A Double-Barreled Detective Story." Only one person
got this, but alas, they had already read it and knew about Twain's
little scam from the book mentioned below. That person is dartvax!perry
(Betsy Perry).
With regard to the first part of the contest, all but one of the serious
responses named as many defects as did the responses in letters received
by Twain about his story in 1902.
Those letters all wondered about the paragraph, but only found one thing
wrong with it. Let me now give you Twain's letter to the Springfield
Republican from April 12, 1902 so that Mark himself can describe the
scam and your responses (the letter is reproduced from "The Complete Short
Stories of Mark Twain," edited by Charles Neider):
"To the Editor of the Republican:
One of your citizens has asked me a question about the "esophagus,"
and I wish to answer him through you. This is in the hope that the answer
will get around, and save me some penmanship, for I have already replied
to the same question more than several times, and am not getting as much
holiday as I ought to have.
I published a short story lately, and it was in that that I put the
esophagus. I will say privately that I expected it to bother some people
-in fact, that was the intention-but the harvest has been larger than I was
calculating upon. The esophagus has gathered in the guilty and the innocent
alike, whereas I was only fishing for the innocent-the innocent and confiding.
I knew a few of these would write and ask me; that would give me but little
trouble; but I was not expecting that the wise and the learned would call
upon me for succor. However, that has happened, and it is time for me to
speak up and stop the inquiries if I can, for letter-writing is not restful
to me, and I am not having so much fun out of this thing as I counted on.
That you may understand the situation, I will insert a couple of sample
inquiries. The first is from a public instructor in the Philippines:
My dear Sir,-I have just been reading the first part of your latest story,
entitled "A Double-barreled Detective Story," and am very much delighted
with it. In Part IV, page 264, Harper's Magazine for January, occurs this
passage: "far in the empty sky a solitary 'esophagus' slept upon motionless
wing; everywhere brooded stillness, serenity, and the peace of God." Now,
there is one word I do not understand, namely, "esophagus." My only work
of reference is the Standard Dictionary, but that fails to explain the
meaning. If you can spare the time, I would be glad to have the meaning
cleared up, as I consider the passage a very touching and beautiful one.
It may seem foolish to you, but consider my lack of means away out in the
northern part of Luzon. Yours very truly.
Do you notice? Nothing in the paragraph disturbed him but that one word.
It shows that that paragraph was most ably constructed for the deception
it was intended to put upon the reader. It was my intention that it should
read plausibly, and it is now plain that it does; it was my intention that
it should be emotional and touching, and you see, yourself, that it fetched
this public instructor. Alas, if I had but left that one treacherous word
out, I should have scored! scored everywhere; and the paragraph would have
slidden through every reader's sensibilities like oil, and left not a
suspicion behind.
The other sample inquiry is from a professor in a New England university.
It contains one naughty word (which I cannot bear to suppress), but he is
not in the theological department, so it is no harm:
Dear Mr. Clemens: "Far in the empty sky a solitary esophagus slept upon
motionless wing."
It is not often I get a chance to read much periodical literature, but
I have just gone through at this belated period, with much gratification
and edification, your "Double-barreled Detective Story."
But what in hell is an esophagus? I keep one myself, but it never
sleeps in the air or anywhere else. My profession is to deal with words,
and esophagus interested me the moment I lighted upon it. But as a
companion of my youth used to say, "I'll be eternally, co-eternally
cussed" if I can make it out. Is it a joke, or I an ignoramus?
Between you and me, I was almost ashamed of having fooled that man, but for
pride's sake I was not going to say so. I wrote and told him it was a joke
-and that is what I am now saying to my Springfield inquirer. And I told
him to carefully read the whole paragraph, and he would find not a vestige
of sense in any detail of it. This also I commend to my Springfield
inquirer.
I have confessed. I am sorry-partially. I will not do so any more-for
the present. Don't ask me any more questions; let the esophagus have a
rest-on his same old motionless wing.
MARK TWAIN"
It is as Twain says: all but one of you just saw the "esophagus" and gave
up there. Now, as to what is wrong with the paragraph, let me point out
a few things line-by-line. In line 1, I would question "spicy morning."
How can a morning be spicy? In lines 2 and 3, lilacs are a shrub with purple
and white flowers, while laburnums are small, leguminous trees with yellow
flowers. Their flowers aren't really all that high up to be "in the upper
air." Further, the colors of the flowers don't exactly indicate "flashing
and burning;" if Twain is referring to the trees and shrubs themselves, they
can't be "hung ... in the upper air." Only the leaves can meet these
specifications, and they aren't mentioned as hanging. Finally, these flowers
do not bloom in the fall, let alone October. Lines 3-5, if stretched
a bit, are somewhat correct. For one thing, "wingless wild things" don't
necessarily "visit together." In lines 6 and 7, the larch and the
pomegranate are not found in the same forests; the pomegranate is grown
in warm areas, while the larch is a northern tree. Further, the colors
mentioned better fit the lilac and laburnum flowers rather than the larch
and the pomegranate. Again, the larch is a member of the pine family and
doesn't change colors with the seasons. In line 9, there is no such thing as
a "deciduous flower." Deciduous trees, yes; deciduous flowers, no. Further,
such flowers, if they existed, would not bloom in the fall. Also in line 9,
what in the world would a "swooning atmosphere" be like? In line 10,
how can there be an "empty sky" with all the stuff in the "upper air" and
all the trees around? Also, there is that persistent "esophagus" around.
In lines 10 and 11, how can anything sleep in the sky "upon motionless
wing?" In lines 11 and 12, the brooding "stillness, serenity, and the
peace of God" conflict with the "spicy morning," "the glory-fires of
autumn," the "burning and flashing," the "purple and Yellow flames in
brilliant broad splashes," "the sensuous fragrance," and "the swooning
atmosphere" of the previous lines.
There are probably other things wrong with this paragraph, but in essence,
unless one were to grant the author TREMENDOUS poetic license, this
paragraph really does not make much sense.
Unfortunately, when this quiz was given in November in net.books (with
pointers to it from net.general, net.followup, and net.misc), I only
got 9 responses. Boy, you people on the Net really have a limited sense
of humor and adventure! There really should have been more inquiries at
that time.
Once again, apologies to those who have already seen this.
Scott Pector
P.S. One of the recent inquirers (Mark Brader at dciem!ntt) also attempted
to solve the paragraph hoax. He was quite successful, getting most
of the contradictions. This has been the best result to date! 'Though
I didn't mean for people to submit guesses to me again, congratulations
Mark!