Re: Salinger and Fruits

From: Kim Johnson <>
Date: Thu Jan 30 2003 - 12:44:06 EST

--- John Gedsudski <> wrote:
> Salinger knew a story like A
> Perfect Day For
> Bananafish was a masterpiece in both form and
> function. Why did it take him
> so long to revise it? Why was the title changed? The
> whole introduction,
> after all, was created last minute but gives us a
> great deal of insight into
> Muriel. In 1948 Salinger didn't have the liberty to
> author a diatribe such
> as Hapworth 16, 1924.

i find the story of the composition of 'a perfect day
for bananafish' very interesting. yagoda did a great
job i thought.

hamilton points out the sea change between the early
work and the real new yorker beginning of apdfb.
wonders about the editing, etc. we now know that
maxwell was instrumental in creating the story as we
have it. (the addition of the muriel scene.)

the extreme crafting evident in '9 stories' marks a
break from the earlier, looser stories. personally, i
feel salinger in his later work goes back to the, i
almost want to say, prolixity of the earlier. (from
'zooey' on.)

and speaking of 'zooey', shawn supposedly 'rescued' a
much longer mss. to create what we now have.

i assume the post-1965 stories, if ever published,
will not be run under the pen of a new yorker editor,
and we will read a salinger totally unfettered.
hapworths to an exponential degree? or stories
marvellous, on the level of 'raise high'?

and it would be fascinating to have the earlier drafts
of the published stories available for reading. fat


Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now.
* Unsubscribing? Mail with the message
Received on Thu Jan 30 12:44:08 2003

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Sun Aug 10 2003 - 21:55:41 EDT