Complaining about the French
J J R (jrovira@juno.com)
Fri, 04 Dec 1998 09:00:19 -0500 (EST)
Ok, I want to make it clear I'm criticizing a Book here, and not a
person. But below is an example of what I Don't like about French's
_J.D. Salinger Revisited_.
Will, if you want to print Anything to send to French, send this one.
I'm taking the time to invest a little bit of thought in what I'm saying
this time :) And I have a wonderful story for you about other terrible
things I've written about things professors have published (for a college
newspaper) that will show that yes, there is justice on this earth, and
yes, I did get what I deserved for my Absolute Insolence at least once :)
At the very hands of the Dean of English at my college, no less :) Love
the guy...
Here's French's passage...
"Rosen also fails to see the importance of his correction of a common
misconception about the novel, which he relegates to a footnote (557),
explaining that Holden could hardly be telling his story to a therapist
at a California sanitarium. Rosen could use far stronger evidence than
he does to make his point, and his speculation that at one point "Holden"
seems to be addressing **the reader**" is unnecessarily cautious. Holden
**is** addressing the reader throughout the novel, from an opening
statement "the first thing youi'll probably want to know is where I was
born" (information a therapist would already have)--to his final--"Don't
ever tell anybody anything" (a curious comment if addressed to a
therapist).
"Holden is appealing directly to a reader he hopes is going to be
interested in listening to him." (French 53,54).
This is Precisely the type of thing that annoys the hell out of me about
the book. If he's going to refer to this issue at all, he should take
the time to present the strengths and weaknesses of both sides of the
discussion before presenting his own opinion--his introduction to the
topic is precisely for the sake of presenting his own opinion, not
instructing his readers about issues in Salinger scholarship.
His failure to do this actually weakens his presentation of his own
opinions, too. He cites as "far stronger evidence" that Holden was "not"
in a sanitarium the fact that a therapist would already know where Holden
was born, and that the statement "Don't ever tell anybody anything" is a
"curious comment" to make to a therapist.
The first example of "far stronger evidence" is about as Unobservant a
comment as could possibly be made about the opening lines of the book.
The full quote is,
"If you really want to hear about it, the first thing you'll probably
want to know is where I was born, and what my lousy childhood was like,
and how my parents were occupied and all before they had me, and all that
David Copperfield kind of crap, but I don't feel like going into it, if
you want to know the truth."
We need to read these lines asking ourselves what demands on him Holden
projects onto his "known reader." The fact that Holden is addressing a
"reader" is so obvious it's not worth mentioning. But the fact that
Holden is addressing a reader with specific expectations is an entirely
different matter. We need to identify the expectations Holden feels are
being placed on him by his known reader, and speculate from there to the
qualities of this reader.
First, "if you really want to hear about it..." Holden was ASKED to
write this account--to write about this unidentified "it," whatever "it"
is. What is this "it"? Again, we can only speculate based upon the
content of the novel. My guess would be that the "it" refers to the
series of events leading Holden to wherever he happens to be at the
moment.
And he further expects his "known reader" to seek explanations in
Holden's childhood--his parental influences, etc. He assumes they will
want him to start his account from this point and move in an orderly
fashion from there to his present situation (David Copperfield kind of
crap). Now, we need to ask, WHAT KIND OF READER would ask for an account
of Holden's present situation, seeing it as the product of his childhood
and early environment?
At the least, I think it's safe to say it "could be" a therapist.
But what's really pathetic about French's citation of the opening lines
is that he interprets the sentence he quoted to mean the "known reader"
was only asking for factual information. But in context, the statement
clearly refers to a desire for knowledge of Holden's upbringing--and the
most personal details of it ("my parents would have two hemorrhages
apiece if I told anything pretty personal about them")--not just basic
facts such as, Where were you born?
My response to the second piece of French's "far stronger evidence" is
Holden's response to his "known reader's" expectations for his account in
the opening of the book. "...but I don't feel like going into it, if you
want to know the truth." Holden is consciously aware of his known
reader's expectations for him, and deliberately violates them, telling
his known reader that he's not going to meet his or her expectations. So
the fact that the second comment--"Don't ever tell anybody anything" may
be a strange thing to say to a therapist certainly isn't proof that
Holden isn't writing to a therapist. In at least one instance when he
demonstrated conscious knowledge of his known reader's expectations he
chose to violate them. It doesn't seem strange to me that he would do so
again. Especially being a youth endowed by Salinger with "colossal
arrogance" (French's description, page 54).
Now, I'm making the argument here that Holden is indeed writing for a
therapist in a sanitarium. I'm not going to pursue the argument further,
though, because that's not my point in this post. My point is simply to
bitch about French's book. He treats an opinion about Salinger's work in
a dismissive way, without giving his readers the reasons some people have
held to that opinion. My intent was to demonstrate that we could hold to
that opinion simply on the basis of the portions of the novel French
examined--I haven't begun to mention parts of the novel French ignored
for the sake of this argument. If he were just writing another piece of
criticism, that would be bad enough. But in an introduction to
Salinger's work and the scholarly issues related to it, it's inexcusable.
Bitchbitchbitch. Ok, I'm having a bad morning ;)
love and kisses,
Jim
___________________________________________________________________
You don't need to buy Internet access to use free Internet e-mail.
Get completely free e-mail from Juno at http://www.juno.com/getjuno.html
or call Juno at (800) 654-JUNO [654-5866]