Re: Salinger's "no-fluff tone"
patrick flaherty (pfkw@email.msn.com)
Sun, 15 Nov 1998 11:02:21 -0500
So, Salinger in like a nice, dry chianti and Fitzgerald is a more
full-bodied zinfandel?
patrick
-----Original Message-----
From: Emily Friedman <bananafish_9@yahoo.com>
To: bananafish@lists.nyu.edu <bananafish@lists.nyu.edu>
Date: Tuesday, November 10, 1998 10:29 PM
Subject: Re: Salinger's "no-fluff tone"
>
>
>
>
>
>---Paul Janse <PJanse@compuserve.com> wrote:
>>
>> I have never found Salionger's style 'dry', matter-of -fact',
>> 'unornamented' or what you would like to call it. ln my opinion he
>is a
>> very careful stylist, something I would not say of Hemingway (as far
>as I
>> know him). Although Salinger's style is not 'baroque' like
>Nabokov's, it
>> has a definite exquisite flavor of its own. I took a completely random
>> sample from F&Z, and blindly picked the sentence "Zooey frowned, but
>> academically". By whom else could this have been written but Salinger?
>>
>> Paul Janse
>>
>I agree that Salinger had a style all of his own but I consider his
>writing style to be dry like a nice red wine. Salingers words are
>quick and to the point but they are put together in great detail
>unlike Hemingway, it's hard for me to explain. It's kind of hard to
>describe baroque as a writing style. Nabokov's work is more poetic and
>full of imagery. His style kind of reminds me of Fitzgerald's style.
>-Liz Friedman
>_________________________________________________________
>DO YOU YAHOO!?
>Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com
>