Re: Teddy = parts of Seymour ?
Sundeep Dougal (holden@giasdl01.vsnl.net.in)
Mon, 20 Sep 1999 14:10:18 +0530
> see that that could be a problem. However, I think this is not so
far from
> what I was saying the other day - that Salinger knows our tendency
to dig
> for autobiography, to dig for meaning - and he plays with it.
Yeah, but that comes into the picture after the unexpected success of
Catcher, as you well go on to point out about the early work, as has
well been commented about even in the early reviews.
> story!) In particular I have noted that he may have found a
structuring
> device for Catcher in the tales of Buddha and several other
religious
> texts.
That could well be said about anything. The thriller writers could be
structuring their stories around the garden of Eden, a seductive bite,
a serpent, the triumph of good over evil...And then there are all
those bits about how there are only 16 themes (or maybe 32?) for any
story and so on.
>On the other hand I do think Salinger was a lot more clued-up about
> Eastern religion - and earlier than we probably know - than we
sometimes
He may well have been. But that matters not. If someone tells me that
Jackie Collins (or name your execrable author here) is actually a Zen
master who's attained satori, read up all the major and minor
religious texts in the world, and even written some under a
nom-de-plume, founding at least a couple of New Age religions under
assumed names, I do not think I would be scurrying to replace the
books on my shelves with those written by her, or to suddenly see a
halo of hitherto unseen light surround them, imbuing them with a
deeper and richer meaning. Or for that matter, because Poppy Z. Brite
has written a story with goddess Kali as the theme, and otherwise also
shown interest in the Occult, it doesn't really make me read her
stories as devout blood-dripping obesiances at the feet of the Mother.
Only because P.G. Wodehouse may have been a Nazi spy, does it mean
that we should start looking for Aryan supremacy theories in his
books, or see them as jew hating? I am sure we could make a very
convincing case, either ways.
Not saying that you are arguing any of the above. Just restating
what's been said n+1 number of times before, among many others, by
yours truly.