Re: Why Salinger Intrigues Me

Prufrock33@aol.com
Tue, 25 Aug 1998 16:24:02 -0400 (EDT)

In a message dated 8/25/1998 12:08:31 PM Pacific Daylight Time,
lomanno@ix.netcom.com writes:

I STUDY THE LIFE OF THE WRITER BECAUSE I LOVE HIM/HER. AFTER I READ BOOK I
SEEM TO GET A LOT MORE EMOTIONALLY OUT OF IT THEN MOST PEOPLE I MEET.  MAYBE I
AM JUDGING HERE, BUT USUALLY WHEN WE SEE OURSELVES AS "CRITICAL READERS" WE
TEND TO LOSE THE RAW EMOTION THAT FINE LITERATURE SETS FORTH.  WE DON'T READ
(AS FAR AS I AM CONCERNED) TO SEE HOW THE WRITER CONSTRUCTS PARAGRAPHS, USES
DIALOGUE, OR DEALS WITH THE TOPIC. AT LEAST I HOPE WE DON'T, UNLESS WE ARE A
POOR LITTLE ENGLISH STUDENT, DOING IT FOR A GRADE. 

ONE OF MY FAVORITE POETS IS E.E. CUMMINGS. I WOULD MUCH RATHER READ HIS BOOKS,
THEN READ ABOUT HIM, BECAUSE I FEEL AS IF I AM NOT READING HIM, BUT I AM
READING MYSELF. I AM NOT GETTING WHAT THEY ARE PUTTING OUT, BUT WHAT I AM
EXTRACTING, MYSELF. IF I STUDY AN AUTHOR IT IS BECAUSE I HAVE READ SO MUCH OF
THEIR WORK THAT I JUST LOVE WHAT THEY DO, AND LOVING WHAT SOMEONE DOES MAKES
ME WANT TO GET TO KNOW THAT PERSON BETTER, FAMOUS WRITER OR NOT. NOW I DO
THINK THERE IS SUCH A THING AS OBSESSION. THERE ARE MORE CRITIQUES OF
SHAKESPEARE OUT THERE THAN  THERE IS PROBABLY LITERATURE, ITSELF.  (MAYBE
NOT.)  WHEN WE BECOME A CRITICAL READER, YES, WE SEEM TO PICK UP ON THINGS WE
MAY HAVE MISSED BEFORE.  YES, WHEN WE STUDY AN AUTHOR WE MAY PICK UP ON SOME
OF THE MEANING IN THE MADNESS (OR VICE VERSA), BUT WE ALSO LOSE SOMETHING AS
WELL.  THE WAY WE FELT WHEN WE FIRST READ THE BOOK.  THE FEELING WE GOT WHEN
THE ONLY DAMN THING WE KNEW WAS WHAT WAS ON THE PAGE AND WHAT IT MEANT TO US
IN OUR HEARTS. 

I AM NOT ATTACKING THE INTELLECTUALS, THE CRITICS, THE RESEARCHERS...I JUST
BELIEVE THAT THERE IS NO SUCH THING, REALLY, AS AN "AMATEUR READER" AS MATT
PUT IT.  MAKES US SOUND LIKE UNLESS WE STUDY SOMEONE'S EVERY LITTLE THING THEN
WE DON'T REALLY READ AT ALL.  I DON'T THINK HE MEANT IT LIKE THAT, THOUGH, I
HOPE. 

I KNOW I AM ALWAYS THE ONE TO SPEAK UP AND SAY THINGS THAT MAKE ABOUT HALF THE
SENSE THEY SHOULD.  OR AT LEAST MOST WOULD SAY.  I SAY EVERYTHING WITH THE
IDEA THAT ALL WILL ACCEPT IT AS MY OPINION...AS I ACCEPT OTHERS.

I JUST HAVE A QUESTION.  WHERE DID ALL THE YOUNG ONES GO (YES, THE ONES
YOUNGER THAN I)?  I HAVE NOT HEARD FROM EITHER IN a while (CGHAYES@AOL.COM
ETC.).  IT MAKES ME WONDER IF SOMEHOW THEY HAVEN'T BEEN SCARED AWAY.  I ALMOST
WAS.

ANGIE.

OH AND GOOD LOOK WITH THE THESIS...SOUNDS LIKE A FABULOUS IDEA TO MOI.
> I'm brand new to the BANANAFISH list, and I'd like to begin by
>  saying this seems to be a great outlet for those of us torn between the
>  desire to know the man who has influenced our lives so profoundly and
>  the need to protect his much-needed privacy.
>  	What intrigues me most about Salinger is the way he has given
>  us so much of himself through his writings, yet he hides as if he's a
>  stranger to us. How can he pour his heart out on paper for all to see,
>  then tell us we don't know him? He has a connection with each and every
>  one of us whether he likes it or not, and this discussion group allows
>  us to express our thoughts about his writing without disturbing his
>  eccentric lifestyle.
>  	I am a graduate student, and I'm thinking of writing my thesis
>  on why we as readers feel the need to "know" the writer in order to 
>  understand and appreciate his writing. Shouldn't the writing stand
>  alone within the context of history and society? Needless to say, 
>  Salinger was the inspiration for this idea. 
>  	For instance, must we know that Salinger likes peas in order to
>  understand the thoughts of Holden Caulfield? Must we delve into 
>  Salinger's Buddhist practices in order to see the Glass family more
>  clearly (no pun intended)? Please let me know your thoughts on this 
>  issue.