Re: more
Camille Scaysbrook (verona_beach@geocities.com)
Sat, 04 Jul 1998 19:34:01 +1000
> He must have guessed by now how I regard
> the work of professional critics - as purely parasitic. I would
> never wish to encourage such unwholesome activities.
> Indeed it's probably only now that he's been
> put on the college syllabus & the poor children are required to read
> the commentaries that he will start to die.
For every person for whom TCIR is ruined by having to study it (which is
undoubtedly a tragedy) I can guarantee you that a good many will go on out
of interest to discover Nine Stories, the Glass family et al. If we ran a
bananafish poll asking who arrived at Salinger in this manner I'm sure we'd
find a good many.
I think you're selling critics a little short - as far as I can see, a good
critic attempts to apply their knowledge and experience fairly and
objectively at the service of illuminating a text. True, to get to such
examples involves wading in a fair amount of self-aggrandising rubbish, but
frequently, it's worth it, and when it isn't, it's as easy as skipping
ahead to the next article. Salinger's writing took on, for example, a whole
new resonance when I began to read the theories about the influence of Zen
on his writing, and also opened me up to the world of Zen.
Naturally I would never suggest the criticism of a work as a substitute for
your own opinion of it, but all a critic is really doing (or should be
doing, and in the naive opinion of my poor young unjaded soul, occasionally
does do) is offering a suggestion for interpretation, which you may or may
not take on to illuminate or enhance your own.
Camille
verona_beach@geocities.com
@ THE ARTS HOLE
www.geocities.com/Hollywood/Theater/6442