I don't doubt various arguments can be brought forward to support or demolish the idea of Holden addressing a therapist. But does no one share my feeling of futility that the question should be even considered ? That seductive, confiding, 'come here & listen to this...' tone of voice seems to me to render finicky & over-literal the attempt to place Holden in any precise setting. I doesn't greatly engage me whether he's talking to an analyst, a friend in the bar, or even his own reflection in the mirror. The magic is all in that droll, embittered, idealistic voice. And it can be all too quickly steamrollered by Jesuitical dissection. While accepting that serious writing deserves serious reading, it's this very finickiness - this clever citing of evidence first one way then the other - that I personally find so irritating in the whole attitude of the professional scholar. Scottie B.