Re: hap's worth

i think that the build up of seymour in prior stories is completely lived up to and more in hapworth. while you certainly were no genius at 7, nor was i, i can fully grasp the language as being that of a 7 year old genius. it's totally immature, the words and language. it's immature seymour who's showing off, the way a seven year old would. i hardly think seymour would write a letter such as this one when he was 28. power in the hands of a child can get unweildy and make splashes all over the place. what's very weird to me is that salinger created a character from the ground up, age 7 to suicide, and wrote about his character through the brother character he brought up from age 5 to flatulent 40. very strange that on the book and in the new yorker these stories are credited to salinger. buddy wrote it. buddy glass.

"just because it's salinger means we'll read it as if it's gold"
mike

Although admittedly it has some interesting insights, there is no way a
child that young could be the sophisticated. What's more, it has no plot,
and only serves as a vehicle for Salinger to show off his vocabulary and
display his infatuation with his own characters.
"just cause its JDS doesn't mean it's gold" tina

-
* Unsubscribing? Mail majordomo@roughdraft.org with the message
* UNSUBSCRIBE BANANAFISH
Received on Fri Jun 27 12:53:25 2003