Re: intelligence of the author vs. intelligence of the characters

From: Kim Johnson <haikux2@yahoo.com>
Date: Tue Sep 03 2002 - 12:32:44 EDT

--- Jim Rovira <jrovira@drew.edu> wrote:
> I actually feel the same way you do about Catcher
> and the Glass stories (I
> get a lot more out of the Glass stories). . .just,
> if you want to judge
> Salinger's influence, there's just no getting around
> or beyond Catcher.
>

i don't really care about salinger's influence. that
doesn't seem to me to be the real question. the real
question is the caliber of the creative work, and not
influence. a writer's worth should not be judged by
the magnitude of his influencing others (bloom
laughs.) 'the catcher' is excellent; it's too bad that
it has overshadowed his other work.

> It's really hard for me to compare Salinger to, say,
> O'Connor and Carver,
> although I agree he stands up well to both (and both
> stand up well to
> him). All three seemed to be coming from completely
> different places.
> There were other writers on the list that probably
> do deserve the same kind
> of attention Salinger gets just by the quality of
> their writing, and then
> there's John Irving -- who drives me nuts but I keep
> finding myself reading
> his novels.

i agree the three are coming from different places,
but they're all arrivng with the muse perched on their
shoulders. yes, the other writers on the list deserve
attention and readership.

 
> Catcher is such an important cultural icon it's
> really not a fair
> comparison to say that people aren't doing
> worthwhile work if they haven't
> written a Catcher. Those types of novels just don't
> come around often,
> period. Rushdie's _Satanic Verses_ actually offers
> me more than Catcher
> does. So does Delillo's _Underground_. Or
> Pynchon's _Gravity's Rainbow_.
> But I'll bet anything someone offering a
> undergraduate class in Salinger
> would get quite a few more registrations than
> someone offering a class in
> Pynchon or Delillo (or both) -- and that most of the
> students in it would
> have already read at least one thing by the author.
>
> Jim

that 'the catcher' has become a cultural icon detracts
from assessing its literary worth. i don't believe
that if a writer hasn't written a 'catcher' he isn't
doing worthwhile work. we were engaged in the smug
parlour game of rating writers.
kim

 
> Kim Johnson wrote:
>
> > --- James Rovira <jrovira@drew.edu> wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > > What you did say in your previous post was that
> > > those programs were a complete waste of time.
> > > That's mistaken. If all you meant was that
> they're
> > > not for everyone, that's an odd way of saying it
> --
> > > it sounded like you meant they weren't for
> anyone.
> >
> > in reading my last post i don't see that i said it
> was
> > a 'complete waste of time.' the post was an off
> the
> > cuff wondering if the mfa programs weren't all
> that
> > they were cracked up to be. that, given the
> thousands
> > of graduates, they hadn't produced someone on the
> > level of a salinger. and i mention the question of
> > temperment of the writer as a possible determining
> > factor on how the mfa might affect him. but i'm
> not
> > fool enough to say that one wouldn't get anything
> out
> > of such a program. that would be absurd. (not that
> > i've been in such a program...so you can discount
> all
> > i've said...) :)
> >
> > > I think you also need to broaden your conception
> of
> > > accomplishment if you're only willing to see
> Raymond
> > > Carver and Flannery O'Connor from the lists
> below as
> > > being "accomplished." It boasts of Pulitzer
> and, I
> > > think, Nobel prize winners -- honors I don't
> think
> > > Salinger ever won.
> >
> > no, i didn't say that no one else was
> 'accomplished.'
> > you asked me to identify those that were as
> > accomplished as salinger. and i stick by my reply
> > that, despite the 'awards', the only two writers
> from
> > your list on salinger's level are o'connor and
> carver.
> > but i'm not saying the others haven't accomplished
> > anything. they're successful, creative writers
> with
> > wonderful vitaes, but not at the level of salinger
> for
> > my book-buying money.
> >
> >
> > > I'm not sure that Nine Stories has much historic
> > > significance outside the fact that it was
> written by
> > > Salinger. While Catcher spawn imitators, I
> don't
> > > think the stories did. I still think For Esme
> and
> > > Pretty Mouth are the best things Salinger ever
> wrote
> > > -- better than Catcher, even. You don't see
> > > Salinger anthologized much at all these days,
> > > though. That may be Salinger's decision, and if
> > > that's the case, he's shooting himself in the
> foot.
> > > If all he wants to be remembered for is Catcher,
> > > then that's the quickest way to do it....
> > >
> >
> > ben yagoda, in his history of 'the new yorker'
> gives a
> > fairly good sense of the excitement salinger
> caused in
> > the late 40s, early 50s with his stories. but to
> show
> > you how flawed my sense of literary worth is, i
> think
> > the glass stories are better, more important, that
> > 'the catcher.'
> >
> > kim
> >
> > __________________________________________________
> > Do You Yahoo!?
> > Yahoo! Finance - Get real-time stock quotes
> > http://finance.yahoo.com
> > -
> > * Unsubscribing? Mail majordomo@roughdraft.org
> with the message
> > * UNSUBSCRIBE BANANAFISH
>
> -
> * Unsubscribing? Mail majordomo@roughdraft.org with
> the message
> * UNSUBSCRIBE BANANAFISH

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Finance - Get real-time stock quotes
http://finance.yahoo.com
-
* Unsubscribing? Mail majordomo@roughdraft.org with the message
* UNSUBSCRIBE BANANAFISH
Received on Tue Sep 3 12:32:47 2002

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Sun Aug 10 2003 - 20:51:45 EDT