Re: new yorker
Camille Scaysbrook (c_scaysbrook@yahoo.com)
Wed, 25 Aug 1999 19:23:36 +1000
D wrote:
>>> I've always thought Salinger must have found some very sympathetic
pals on the editorial staff at the New Yorker over the years. Just the
sheer volume of work published there and the relationships he had with
various editors seem to make that pretty obvious, no? <<<
Absolutely. I'm no expert on the sorts of authors they were publishing at
the time but I can barely imagine them giving such leeway to ... well,
anybody! I was amazed when I tracked down the Hapworth 16 edition that it
basically *was* the Hapworth 16 edition - that's pretty much the whole
magazine. Could you imagine them doing that today??? Never! Not for
*anybody* (OK, maybe they would for him, ironically enough (: ) But even in
1965 *anything* by Salinger would have been seen as quite a coup, maybe
this would have been enough to grant him a lot of leniency. Perhaps there
already were inklings that Salinger was about to jump ship; maybe behind
the scenes this was, well ... the Hapworth Orchises Press Edition of its
day! Does anyone have any figures on how well that particular edition sold?
Or any of the Salinger editions for that matter? I've always been curious
as to how contemporary audiences received things like `The Inverted
Forest'.
Camille
verona_beach@geocities.com
_________________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com