Re: Cheever and Salinger


Subject: Re: Cheever and Salinger
From: Cecilia Baader (ceciliabaader@yahoo.com)
Date: Fri Jun 21 2002 - 23:44:25 EDT


--- Jim Rovira <jrovira@drew.edu> wrote:
> Nah, Cecilia, you REALLY need to read Umberto Eco's _Foucault's
> Pendulum_ if you haven't already :)

Um, yeah. I have, actually. However, I don't think that Eco's grand
vision has anything to do with "A Perfect Day for Bananafish". You've
built a straw man by even mentioning it, in fact.

However, to address your argument: that you can make numeric connections
to *anything* doesn't mean that no connections exist. Especially in
Salinger, understanding the subtext often depends on ferreting out the
most insignificant details. The story (besides "A Perfect Day for
Bananafish") that best illustrates this point is "The Laughing Man".
Think about the baby carriage and the other tiny details that point to the
reasons behind the breakup between the Chief and the Beaver-coated
heroine.

I've long thought that there was a meaning to the numbers in bananafish,
and the Kabbalistic meaning to six seemed possible. It still does, in
fact, especially given Salinger's background.

Regards,
Cecilia.

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! - Official partner of 2002 FIFA World Cup
http://fifaworldcup.yahoo.com
-
* Unsubscribing? Mail majordomo@roughdraft.org with the message
* UNSUBSCRIBE BANANAFISH



This archive was generated by hypermail 2b25 : Tue Sep 17 2002 - 16:26:07 EDT