J.D. Salinger Dead at 91

One of my favorite quotes from the book(censorship added by me for obvious reasons):

That's the whole trouble. You can't ever find a place that's nice and peaceful, because there isn't any. You may think there is, but once you get there, when you're not looking, somebody'll sneak up and write "**** you" right under your nose. Try it sometime. I think, even, if I ever die, and they stick me in a cemetery, and I have a tombstone and all, it'll say "Holden Caulfield" on it, and then what year I was born and what year I died, and then right under that it'll say "**** you." I'm positive, in fact.

It's funny in it's bluntness, but at the same time it's very true.
 
You're all a bunch of phonies!
 
He was a good author. I thought Catcher in the Rye was ok, VERY well written, but I did not like the responses people had to it, and only marginally liked the story. For those who disliked it, a very important point of the story is that the kid's legit mentally ill, don't forget that. That said, the times were a bit phony back then, say those older folks who remember WHY crazy counter culture liked the hippies spawned in the first place.
 
I was forced to read that in school. Dear god it's a bad book. Holden is one of those characters that makes you despair for the human race, and the book isn't even that well-written. If that's classic literature, my 5-year old crayon scribble on my mother's wedding dress is priceless art. Horrible author, made worse by the fact he's so respected.
 
He was a good author. I thought Catcher in the Rye was ok, VERY well written

What the hell are you on about? Those rambling sentences make me want to claw my eyes out. There is no way in hell that Holden could possibly have gotten an A in English; and if he could be considered a good writer in an English class, that just says more for the lack of quality of modern English writing.
 
I'd just like to note, once again, that Red Badge has the only more despicable protagonist.
 
What the hell are you on about? Those rambling sentences make me want to claw my eyes out. There is no way in hell that Holden could possibly have gotten an A in English; and if he could be considered a good writer in an English class, that just says more for the lack of quality of modern English writing.

Are you serious? That book had some of the best descriptions of situations, places and people I've ever read.
 
Here's a proper eulogy:

J.D. Salinger, cool when culture heroes were in


J.D. Salinger (Lotte Salinger/associated Press)

By Henry Allen
Friday, January 29, 2010


At the end, with J.D. Salinger dead at 91, we have no memories of him.

That is to say, we have no cranky anecdotes about thrown drinks, no second cousins who once stood next to him at a roulette table, no paparazzi pictures of him with his long face and solemn eyes staring with predatory kindness at some starlet in Malibu (careful not to look at her breasts, of course).
He was a sort of saint to his upscale readers, a foe of the cruel and the vulgar, a practitioner of Zen Buddhism, it was said, a man who in his writing found his masculinity in sensitivity and self-deprecation.
Not like Hemingway on safari or Fitzgerald in the fountain in front of the Plaza Hotel or Kerouac hurling himself back and forth across America.
They were famous public figures. Salinger was merely famous, idolized, envied; an acutely private figure who was a recluse for more than 50 years in Cornish, N.H. He was still famous when he died.
But we have no memories of him, to speak of, aside from gritty memoirs by his daughter, Margaret, and the writer Joyce Maynard, who, as a freshman at Yale, found herself in a claustrophobic grind of a relationship with him. And lawsuits protecting his privacy and copyrights, and the endless rumors of insanity or Buddhist monkhood.
Back when he was publishing -- his last short story appeared in the New Yorker in 1965 -- he was a demigod in a cult that seemed like a conspiracy between his books and his readers. He had mystique and a second-hand charisma that came from his prose, not his persona. His glamour dwindled with the decades. Once, believe it or not, boys wanted to be J.D. Salinger, cool and knowing. They thought they were, in fact, Holden Caulfield, the hero of "The Catcher in the Rye," Salinger's first book and only novel, now appearing on better high school reading lists.
Making reading required takes its toll on culture heroes. And writers were once culture heroes in America, people you wanted to touch, like weeping statues or movie stars.

Salinger was once considered subversive, in his wry, quiet, tweedy way, the sort of guy who stands in a corner for the whole party and then goes home with the most beautiful girl there. But how can you be subversive when your books are assigned by the sort of educational pooh-bahs whom Holden might have spotted as phonies -- a concept he taught us in an age when authenticity was the great virtue to sensitive outsiders?
In their better moments, Holden and members of Salinger's vast, epically self-conscious Glass family would have seen the phonies for what they were, but -- saints that they were -- they would have forgiven them with the ironic condescension that rang clear and cool as a tuning fork in their creator's prose.
Gone, all gone: the authenticity, the spirituality, the writer as hero, the belief that literature could save us, as a critic and prophet named Lionel Trilling said somewhere back then.
Still, for those of us growing older until we find ourselves growing old, hope lives on, and Salinger's death is a happy occasion.

The manuscripts: There are said to be novels, stories, maybe even haiku -- Salinger brought haiku to our attention, never dreaming that they would become banal, refrigerator poetry brought home from school. These manuscripts are in bank vaults or salt mines or someplace safe from the clamoring crowd, it is said.

Does he become America's Proust, with endless chronicles of the Glass family, some of whose children, notably Waker and Walt, had yet to come on stage when Salinger stopped publishing?
One hears of a war novel and thinks of his finest short story, "For Esme -- With Love and Squalor," about a sensitive, ironic, condescending but forgiving soldier whose nervous system is shattered by combat, as Salinger's seems to have been, in World War II Europe.
Could a whole novel be that good? If so, if so . . .
On the other hand, his last published story, called "Hapworth 16, 1924," was a pretentious, self-reflexive slog of the sort you might expect when a writer creates a 7-year-old genius-saint character, Seymour Glass, who writes a 25,000-word letter from camp.
The story is not about the letter; it is the letter.
Even in 1961, when Time magazine was putting Salinger on its cover, the Glass family saga was getting a little tiresome, and it would get more so, to the point where we, his faithful readers, found ourselves forgiving Salinger, rather than Salinger forgiving us.
Salinger had gone out of his way to meet Hemingway during the war, and Hemingway was said to have called him a "helluva" talent.
Hemingway was a writer who made unhappiness beautiful. Salinger took it a step further -- with the same uncanny ability to evoke the world his characters move through, he made it a virtue.
Oh, how I needed this reassurance when I was 12 or 13. (I'm 68 now.) One day, I was looking at my parents' bookshelves and asked about that odd title.
"It's too old for you," my mother said with a tone bearing not a little ulterior motive.
That night, after my parents had gone to bed, I turned on my light and started reading.
"Catcher" got me with the first line, and I became a devotee, newly coined from the dross of adolescence into the gold of irony and self-consciousness. I wasn't just agonized with my despairs. I was a member of some order of righteous adolescence, a kid standing in the corner and watching the phonies at the party.
I could go on, but I'll take caution from that first line: "If you really want to hear about it . . ." You don't, of course, because you may well have your own Salinger story to tell.
We can hope, in the name of redemption, both his and ours, that Salinger has his own stories waiting for us, at long last.

Henry Allen, who won the Pulitzer Prize for criticism in 2000, was a Post editor and reporter for 39 years.

(Source: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dy...28/AR2010012804098_2.html?sid=ST2010012803251) Also links to further articles on J.D. Salinger.
 
Are you serious? That book had some of the best descriptions of situations, places and people I've ever read.

Perhaps you should stop reading trash, then?
 
What the hell are you on about? Those rambling sentences make me want to claw my eyes out. There is no way in hell that Holden could possibly have gotten an A in English; and if he could be considered a good writer in an English class, that just says more for the lack of quality of modern English writing.

The charm of the Catcher in the Rye is that the story came truly alive. That requires good writing. Whether or not it was a worth story worth bringing to life...
 
well, since i'm not cool enough to dislike catcher in the rye, i'm gonna go ahead and say that it is one of my favourite books. troll away, but i liked it.
 
The charm of the Catcher in the Rye is that the story came truly alive. That requires good writing. Whether or not it was a worth story worth bringing to life...
The more alive that story became the more dead I felt inside. I honestly don't get the love for it.
 
RIP. Catcher in the Rye was one of my favorite teeny-bopper reads.

:salute: Salute too. Didn't know that Salinger was a Normandy vet.


Edit: anyways, I find it funny people are hating on the book. It's basically an older generation's Twilight or Harry Potter. Not like it was a War and Peace or something.
 
Edit: anyways, I find it funny people are hating on the book. It's basically an older generation's Twilight or Harry Potter. Not like it was a War and Peace or something.

It was also quite controversial back then. By 1981, it was still the most banned in high schools but it was also the second most taught. It epitomized the educational gulf between the more backwards school systems and the more progressive ones.
 
It was also quite controversial back then. By 1981, it was still the most banned in high schools but it was also the second most taught. It epitomized the educational gulf between the more backwards school systems and the more progressive ones.

Yeah, but basically just another censorship issue. It's just extra-sensationalism, but it doesn't make the true literary quality of the book any worse or better than it is. The main controvery was the book dropping the F-bomb, like once!
 
Comparing him to Hemingway is a bit grand, he has a half dozen novels far better than Catcher.
 
Yeah, but basically just another censorship issue. It's just extra-sensationalism, but it doesn't make the true literary quality of the book any worse or better than it is. The main controvery was the book dropping the F-bomb, like once!

I think it was largely taught as an object lesson as to why censorship based on a few words was so absurd. It also served the purpose to show many that not all books had to be boring and about subjects which they couldn't relate. And that a large part of being a teenager is universal. That all generations have gone through basically the same growing pains whether they want to now admit it or not.
 
Once again, The Onion says it best...

The Onion said:
Bunch Of Phonies Mourn J.D. Salinger

CORNISH, NH—In this big dramatic production that didn't do anyone any good (and was pretty embarrassing, really, if you think about it), thousands upon thousands of phonies across the country mourned the death of author J.D. Salinger, who was 91 years old for crying out loud. "He had a real impact on the literary world and on millions of readers," said hot-shot English professor David Clarke, who is just like the rest of them, and even works at one of those crumby schools that rich people send their kids to so they don't have to look at them for four years. "There will never be another voice like his." Which is exactly the lousy kind of goddamn thing that people say, because really it could mean lots of things, or nothing at all even, and it's just a perfect example of why you should never tell anybody anything.
 
Back
Top Bottom