up shit creek with a turd for a paddle? whew, that one stank! duffman!
perhaps he had written out all his character histories and wanted to create
new characters with different histories that might give him opportunity to try
unique (to him at the very least) different short story forms.
why the striking similarities then, between the caulfields/glasses. if he was
going to create new characters under a new surname...
there was a reason for the surname change and i think it has nothing to do
with the story/spiritual avenues that were open for either the glasses or
caulfields. my assumption is that he thought seymour glass was more clever
sounding than kenneth, vincent, or even holden. i think cleverness was
salinger's wooden leg. and that's why i am compelled to read further than
biographies will go! because he's got some THING going on underneath it all
and whoever guesses it correctly will be drivin in a hummer limosine to his
door to read all the stories he's written since 1965 in privacy before all
else! yay! i have left the building!
>>> daniel.yocum@Peterson.af.mil 08/27/03 10:34AM >>>
No but where would we be without see more glass and Buddy said BUUUUUUDEEEE.
Daniel
oh. i still think that with most of the public only having CITR in their
fat
little hands, that salinger COULD have made the caulfields into whatever he
wanted to. the surname change, i don't think, is what made the glasses
"pan-the whole world in my head superlative." would there be all that much
a
difference if hapworth was a letter from kenneth to vincent, as opposed to
seymour to buddy?
-
* Unsubscribing? Mail majordomo@roughdraft.org with the message
* UNSUBSCRIBE BANANAFISH
-
* Unsubscribing? Mail majordomo@roughdraft.org with the message
* UNSUBSCRIBE BANANAFISH
Received on Wed Aug 27 13:48:22 2003
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Thu Oct 16 2003 - 00:28:17 EDT