Subject: Re: In Conclusion
From: Robbie (vasudeva@pacbell.net)
Date: Mon May 22 2000 - 17:24:07 GMT
Cecilia Baader said:
<< But what is it, Matt, that we're supposed to be expecting at the
end? Is that your
criticism? That we aren't really expecting anything concrete? >>
I think what he means is that the story is written in such a way as to
have the reader anticipating a murder, only to be shocked by a suicide
(i.e., Salinger wanted us to think of Muriel as the materialistic
bananafish and to be shocked that the materialism that causes
bananafever is of a Different Sort). The story is a failure, then, in
that we never expect Seymour to murder Muriel and we know he's the
bananafish right from the start.
But personally, I'm not sure that theory holds next to the fact I heard
thrown about a while back that the whole scene with Muriel on the phone
was added after some comments by an editor or some such thing. In the
story's original form the reader did not meet Muriel until she's asleep
on one of the twin beds -- and that is assuming that her sleeping figure
wasn't added to tie the first scene in with the second; maybe
"bananafish" originally starred a bachelor.
-robbie
-
* Unsubscribing? Mail majordomo@roughdraft.org with the message
* UNSUBSCRIBE BANANAFISH
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b25 : Thu Jun 01 2000 - 09:45:26 GMT