> Ah, Camille, Camille, I didn't say that Holden is Salinger's opinion. Neither did I. I just meant that we should keep Holden and Salinger as two separate entities in our mind. Naturally it's impossible to say that there is none of Salinger in Holden - there's a little bit of the author in *all* of his or her characters. But I do think it's dangerous to say, for example `Holden did this, and therefore that's what Salinger would do.' It's interesting to speculate on how similar Holden was to Salinger as a young guy, but ultimately not very productive because A) we'll never know and B) ultimately it should be irrelevant. I do see your point, but I think I have a lower estimate of its importance than you do. On the other hand, I certainly don't subscribe to Roland Barthes' ideas about the Death of the Author. Naturally it's impossible for the author not to be present in some way. But in a bad story, the author is a person standing on a stage reading out his or her story. In a good story, no matter how close the story or characters are to their heart, the author should merely be a ghost in the projection room slowly and nearly silently hand cranking the camera. > It's like Wuthering Heights, if I remember correctly, which was > written by Bronte who is, indeed, female, but from a male point of view. That's a moot point - yes, the frame narrator is male but he only listens to a female (the servant who tells him the story of Cathy and Heathcliff and whose name escapes me) tell him the story. So it's not actually from a male point of view. Camille verona_beach@geocities.com @ THE ARTS HOLE www.geocities.com/Hollywood/Theater/6442