> i think the 'salinger on acid' notion is borne of critics who recognize that > coupland is trying to write *modern* stories (of which salinger is master)... > faintly, then, people might be inclined to compare the 2...i find couplands > stuff ends up lacking finesse...it reads like he went back in and stuck > paragraphs and pages to lend his novel the sense of erraticism (which is an > obvious description of current times) to qualify it as work of 'our era'...its > just simple mtv stuff.... I don't know that it's so much the modernity of his stories, but just the (fairly generalised) idea that a long, apparently formless story with lots of digressions it what he's all about, which we all know is true to a point, but only to a point. People like having pigeonholes to stick writers in (especially new writers). Apart from that I think the two men have totally different styles, anyway. Salinger is definitely a better short story writer (I've always found Coupland's short story collections very uneven, with very high highs and very dull and badly constructed lows) But then again, it's difficult to compare two writers doing similar things but 40-odd years apart. Camille verona_beach@geocities.com @ THE ARTS HOLE www.geocities.com/Hollywood/Theater/6442 THE INVERTED FOREST www.angelfire.com/pa/invertedforest