Re: From Daumier to Smith
Camille Scaysbrook (verona_beach@hotpop.com)
Wed, 15 Sep 1999 21:39:22 +1000
Jonathon wrote:
> Isn't that one of the Points of the story, that he is phoney Daumier at
an
> early Point in the story, and honest Smith either by the end of the
story,
Yes, I think you're right, the main point of the story is a journey towards
authenticity and non-phoniness. It fits right into that search for the
truth that all of Salinger's characters are on. At the beginning of the
story, DDS (and we never do learn his real name) is living under an assumed
name earning a living on a job gained from phony credentials (which in the
end turns out to be a phony business itself) teaching phonies how to draw -
to represent life as it is. Obviously his two other students misrepresent
life in a sentimental or fatuous way, but what DDS seems to recognise in
the nun's artwork is authenticity, reality. Perhaps part of JDS fascination
with asceticism is the perception that such people are somehow living a
life that is more worthy - more `real' - than the rest of us. DDS's
character journey is one towards authenticity, from complexity and
subterfuge to the transcendent simplicity represented by the Japanese
artist - although we don't really see him achieve it in the course of the
story, we know by his narration of the story that he did eventually achieve
it and could look back humorously at himself. So in a way he is actually
Salinger's *most* self reflexive character - because, although the majority
of the Glass canon occurs retrospectively, it is mediated every step of the
way by Buddy who, despite his better judgements (or perhaps following it)
could not avoid stooping to hagiography. You never doubt that DDS is
telling the truth, because he's so self-deprecating. Buddy occasionally is
too but in such a different way - like when he explains how he and Seymour
were unattractive as young men, in S:AI. There's even something a bit
repugnantly self-righteous in Buddy's later admission that `a confessional
passage has probably never been written that didn't stink a little bit of
the writer's pride in having given up his pride.' It's this sort of fatuous
self knowledge that distances me emotionally from the Glasses but makes me
feel a lot closer to the happily flawed Holden and DDS.
Someone pointed out the humour in DDS, and I was never aware that so many
people had missed it! It's kind of like a neighbour of mine who used to
watch `The Hitch-hikers Guide to the Galaxy' stony-faced because he thought
it was a drama, not a comedy. To those of you who didn't notice it, I
implore you to read it again! Though there's humour in later Salinger I
think it too becomes a little odd and strained - there's something slightly
sick in laughing about a seven year old boy musing about how odd it is that
he should be getting sexual stirrings at his age. DDS is a lot of fun while
having its poignant edge - as Ed pointed out, it is actually (like Catcher)
a coming of age story, and it is at least interesting to see how
differently Salinger treats that theme to Catcher.
By the way - who else here thinks Salinger has just about the greatest
`retrospective' voice in
literature? Every time I read `The Laughing Man' I can't help but think of
the voice over in `The Wonder Years' (:
P.S. You'll have to tell me where to find that article! Is it in `Salinger:
A Critical and Personal Portrait'? I remember reading an essay along the
lines you describe in there, but not for a long time. I always welcome new
interpretations of DDS especially because parts of it are so mysterious in
a very enticing way.
Camille
verona_beach@hotpop.com