J.D. Salinger’s death
January 29, 2010
J.D. Salinger died today. He only published four books and I’m sure 90% of the people who’ve read him only read one of those. But the appeal of Catcher In The Rye has been constant for “The Youths”. It is a sign of a strong work of art when it consistently appeals to a certain age group. The most striking aspect of Catcher In The Rye to me was how my reaction changed to it and Holden Caulfield as I got older. I first read it when I was sixteen or so and I related to Holden and his world view. Everyone’s a big phonie, ha! Reading it years later, I thought Holden was a jerk and a hypocrite! He annoyed me to no end, which is to say I found my own teen age attitude annoying. I thought it was a neat writing trick to have pulled off: the text did not change, but the reader’s perspective adding layers to the book.
Franny & Zooey is to Catcher In The Rye what The Kinks are to The Beatles. It has always seemed like one-upmanship to bring it up when someone says they like the latter. Its like saying, “Oh, their older stuff is better,” or “But if you like Leonard Cohen, you REALLY have to listen to Jacque Brel.” Dropping that name is like flashing a badge that says, “I’m Cooler Than You Are”. All the same, I do prefer Franny & Zooey. The conflict the characters were going through seemed more important and harder to manage then Holden Caulfield’s, the relationships of the family members more interesting.
J.D. Salinger never let his books get turned into movies, plays or wacky sitcoms (SUCH a good idea!). No one really knows why but I, like everyone else I imagine, attributed it to high moral values about the integrity of one’s art. He didn’t want his beautiful art sullied by the commercial world! It occurred to me with his death that maybe he was just a nut. Maybe he found attention painful and simply couldn’t manage. Less admirable, though maybe just as interesting. At this point, though, his works (including a rumored fifteen unpublished novels!) are in the hands of “his estate”, probably his son. Perhaps their principles, or social ineptness, aren’t so strong and we’ll see Jason Schwartzman playing Holden Caulfield in a Wes Anderson production. Ha! Despite J.D.’s resistance, a number of writers and film makes made “loving tributes” of him and his works.
#1) Gus Van Sant’s lame Finding Forrester was based on the idea of what J.D. Salinger must be doing with his life. It was a bit ridiculous, adding to the phonie mystique his seclusion is supposed to mean, as well as just being a rushed, boring movie. The scene where Sean Connery tells his prodigy he needs to type with passion is one of the most ridiculous sediments I can think of. Not recommended, definitely one of Gus Van Sant’s weakest.
#2) Igby Goes Down seemed right out of Catcher In The Rye, but with out any trace of a sympathetic character.
#3) Gosh, I’m ripping on all of these, aren’t I? But I do love Wes Anderson. Previously mentioned, he has drawn largely from Salinger. His first movie, Bottlerocket, has overt references to Franny & Zooey and The Royal Tenenbaum family seems modeled after the Glass family from that book as well. The introspection J.D. Salinger offered is there, but purposely buffoonish. Zooey’s search for a religious experience and the brother’s in Darjeeling Limited is a good example of the contrast.
#4) The strongest use of Salinger, I think, was in Dr. Frank– err, Frank Portman‘s novel, King Dork. Frank really did a good job of slamming Catcher In The Rye‘s reputation while modeling itself after it at the same time. The book is not without it’s flaws (reckless portrayal of teen girls, a forced plot conflict to end the book), but it captures dorky punk boys well in their charm and failures and if you think Catcher In The Rye needs some humbling, it offers a good case. Hopefully someone will read that as a teen and say, “Yeah, that’s what MY life is like!” and re-read it years letter and go, “Yikes! That’s what I was like?!?”
