Re: teddy, at ten, is seymour at thirty.

You have a point about not necessarily knowing when something was
written simply by looking at publication date. That kind of information
usually comes from correspondence of some sort, and usually isn't
complete. If you have to guess, it's safe to guess that what was
published later was written later (especially when years intervene), but
there are always exceptions and it's always a guess.

I'm not really supporting any idea other than the fact that there are
two ways (at least) of approaching Salinger's work (chronological and
treating them as a whole), and they both have their merits and
limitations.

If this is threatening to you, perhaps you're the one afraid of being wrong.

I think you do, however, point out some possible limitations in a
chronological approach.

Jim

ANELLO Michael J wrote:

>who "knows" when he wrote teddy. or bananafish. isn't all that's "known" is
>when the stories were published? do you know because you looked? at what?
>i'll go look. i'm not saying he wrote teddy before bananafish or anything
>like that. i'm just saying that sometimes something is achieved by arguing
>outside "the box." relying on only what's known are the last words of the
>person who's afraid of being wrong at all costs.
>
>

-
* Unsubscribing? Mail majordomo@roughdraft.org with the message
* UNSUBSCRIBE BANANAFISH
Received on Wed Aug 27 11:59:34 2003