Valerie Thompson wrote: > That's taking it all a bit far, I think. If you say Holden could have > been making Allie up, we have no reason to believe anything Holden says > or anything any fictional character says. While characters do have their > own motives, etc... I don't think it makes sense to doubt something like > that. That's my point, more or less. A psychologically disturbed person is not likely to render accounts of his experiences objectively and accurately. And so if we question Holden Caulfield's psychological stability, we also call into question the total integrity of his narrative. If you really want to push the issue of Holden's "sanity," you have to consider the possiblity that a disturbance in the narrator might bring about a disturbance in the narrative. My point is that readers generally *don't* question the veracity of Holden's narrative--nor should they. There is no reason to do so, except from a removed clinical standpoint, and not many of us read from that position. Personally, I never found that anything Holden says or does calls into question his psychological state. The things that happen to him happen to a lot of people--they happen in some degree to most teenage western persons who are thoughtful. -- Matt Kozusko mkozusko@parallel.park.uga.edu