Re: The Worst?
Camille Scaysbrook (verona_beach@geocities.com)
Tue, 01 Jun 1999 22:32:47 +1000
> Thor wrote:
>
> << Stil haven't read Hapworth, but, so far worst Salinger >>
>
> OK, I liked Hapworth. I thought it was Salinger's most funny and teasing
> story. I found it very alluring.
> -MW
Thankyou. Finally someone who isn't a member of the I Hate Hapworth Club (:
I think you've gotta try to go in to Hapworth with an open mind - as
Salinger's `amateur reader'. Cause if you're amongst the roses and you're
sniffing for the manure, you can be sure you're gonna find it before you
find the roses. I'm afraid with all the talk and build up that people are
expecting it to be either a revelation or a piece of crap. It's
neither, but don't let yourself be swayed one way or the other before you
read it. I read Catcher knowing little more about it than what I had read
in an interview with Winona Ryder - and to me that was absolutely the best
way to read it. In a way, Hapworth's not so far from Catcher, in technique
especially, but it is true that this can be an alienating effect here while
in Catcher it is quite the opposite. Still, there's something very
appealing about Seymour - he reminds me of a lot of the children I used to
teach drama to, who would utterly amaze you by demonstrating they fully
understood something you'd expect would have gone way over their heads.
And, while I would
sometimes like to bash young Seymour and Teddy's heads together, there are
certainly some nice moments in Hapworth. Like the Happys. I like them a
lot. So I guess what I'm saying is: don't go looking for Catcher, don't go
looking for Zooey, don't even go looking for Seymour: An Introduction. In
some ways, pretend you don't even know who Seymour is.
Camille
verona_beach@geocities.com
@ THE ARTS HOLE http://www.geocities.com/Hollywood/Theater/6442
@ THE INVERTED FOREST http://www.angelfire.com/pa/invertedforest