One day, a prose chapbook sprouted from CREWRT-L...

The Tao of Catch

It is difficult to predict what topics will cause conversations to flourish and prose to sparkle. John Gilgun just wanted to know why anyone would want to play catch. A baseball. Two people. Two gloves. Back and forth. Mind-numbing repetition. It looked to him like a very boring, very useless activity. On Monday, May 6, 1996, he ask his colleagues on CREWRT-L what they thought. He found, from the responses, that "catch" might be boring, but it's not useless, especially not as a topic of conversation.
John Gilgun: A query
Wendy Battin: Zazen, yes
David Hopes: Bonding, yes
Jim Cervantes: Yes!
Russ Kesler: An unarticulated bond
Halvard Johnson: Found art
Maxianne Berger: Proprioception & synecdoche
John Gilgun: A game with no score?
Heidi Jo Walters: Laughter
Palmer Hall: Competitive satori?
Carrie Hemenway: Pennies & chimneys & parental relations
Valentine M. Smith: Generations of bonding
Kate Bozich: Rhythm, indefinitely
Ed Byrne: Miss & chase
Gary Arms: Catch as catch can, or 90mile-an-hour baseballs for breakfast
Jim Cervantes: Quantification de zen
Ed Byrne: Pepper danger
Susan York: Peeps into the past
Jim Cervantes: Throw the other side of catch
visits here since 07 May 1996

Care to contribute a comment on catch? Anything is fine: poetry, prose, literary & cultural theorizing, whatever.

Title (optional):




RhetNet home