Re: jds&postmodernism

• Messages sorted by: [ date ][ thread ][ subject ][ author ]
• Next message: Camille Scaysbrook: "Re: Tarantino and J.D. Salinger"
• Previous message: Camille Scaysbrook: "Re: jds&postmodernism"
• Maybe in reply to: WILL HOCHMAN: "jds&postmodernism"

Some excellent points ... I guess we could characterise Salinger as cuspal
postmodernist. (But then again, you can never really talk of total purity
in something like this) He's at the transitional point between the two - as
you can see when he moves from something like To Esme (tight modernist
structure) to S: AI (looser `postmodern' structure and concerns)


> lisble (readerly)/scriptible (writerly)
> Things break down here. I need to look at this more. 

I don't know about that ... to me (and I'm speaking mainly of his later
texts) Salinger is *very* much a scriptible writer. Something like S:AI in
particular - Buddy makes clear that this as much a writing exercise for him
as it is a reading exercise for the reader - if not more.

Boy there's some gold to be mined here!

Camille 
verona_beach@geocities.com
@ THE ARTS HOLE
www.geocities.com/Hollywood/Theater/6442
THE INVERTED FOREST
www.angelfire.com/pa/invertedforest

• Next message: Camille Scaysbrook: "Re: Tarantino and J.D. Salinger"
• Previous message: Camille Scaysbrook: "Re: jds&postmodernism"
• Maybe in reply to: WILL HOCHMAN: "jds&postmodernism"