Salon@615-Elizabeth Strout with Ann Patchett 

Patchett is reading 'Connor in a literal way, and with literary logic. O'Connor agrees with Patchett as anyone knows who's read her diaries or letters. Read her on James Baldwin, Elizabeth Ames, or writers who are not Christian. I agree she judges herself; how could she not, as she breaches her own espoused standards constantly. You might also want to want to read her fury, in her letters, at being described by critics as symbolic!

@@lizziebkennedy7505 Thanks for sharing... I'm not that much of a fan or a scholar that I've read her letters. I wrote this comment three years ago, before the pile on of the last two years since O"Conner's "other correspondence" was released (I never read those either). She is in heaven now, free from her frailties and the culture that affected her formation, thankfully. As for symbolism... All fiction "points to other things" in one form or another... which is symbolism. Any passing essay I've read about O"Connor's work talks about symbolism. Whether the writer likes it or not, the reader often gets to decide. She may not have wanted symbolism to be a part of her work, but it's there. I see it. Cheers.