HOW SALINGER AND HEMINGWAY ARE ELITISTS. Mary McCarthy, in her essay “J.D. Salinger’s Closed Circuit,” pointed out: “Like Hemingway, Salinger sees the world in terms of allies and enemies … ‘The Catcher in the Rye’ … is based on a scheme of exclusiveness. The characters are divided into those who belong to the club and those who don’t.” ( I found the quote in this article).
Categories
Archives
Recent Comments
- “A COMFORT BLANKET FOR THE SMUG”? (1)
- Nick: Further informing my perspective was that in the writings of classical Romans the middle-aged authors opined...
- ARE PEOPLE LESS VIOLENT? (COMMENT). (2)
- Dick Weisfelder: My prior comment was just in the context of sports. Whether or not from Pinker, I have seen the...
- erik: It seems doubtful that human nature has changed. The most likely explanation would be that modern culture gives...
- HOW BANKS PREPARED FOR A U.S. DEFAULT. (2)
- GREECE’S ADVANTAGE IN THE CHICKEN GAME. (2)
- Nick: That makes sense. It reminds me of the stories Pater Familias would tell me about how in Boston the person with...
- Dick Weisfelder: Greece seems to me to be playing a game that Karl Deutsch called “underdog.” While one...
- FOOTBALL PLAYERS DELIBERATELY CAUSING CONCUSSIONS? (3)
- Nick: It was my understanding that boxing gloves were to protect the puncher’s hands and not the...
- Dick Weisfelder: Remember the Roman arenas? Bare knuckled boxing? Such injuries were taken as natural and accepted in...
- Mary Jane Schaefer: This isn’t about football. Or even sportsmanship. Well, it is about sportsmanship. But what...
- A 25 % CHANCE OF A EURO DEFAULT? (1)
- Nick: The fact that this has gone on for so long is pretty perplexing. The Economist is referring back to articles it...
- DECIDING WHAT KIND OF PATIENT YOU ARE. (1)
- Dick Weisfelder: One can be very open to new technology, but also risk averse. The recent debates about how to...
- “A COMFORT BLANKET FOR THE SMUG”? (1)
Meta
Whenever the topic comes up, I point out that I don’t think CATCHER IN THE RYE is that good. They respond, “You should have read that in your adolescence.” But I read it when I was 14 and even then it seemed juvenile, unrealistic, frustrating, and pointless.
Nick’s reaction is typical for his generation. It reflects how different the opportunities and experiences of young people are today from those of the 40s and 50s when Philip and I were growing up. But I must admit that the book already seemed unrealistic to me when I read it in the mid-fifties.
Pingback: THE CATCHER IN THE RYE—A GENERATIONAL DIFFERENCE? (COMMENT). | Pater Familias
Pingback: NOVELISTS AS SNOBS. | Pater Familias
Pingback: HOLDEN CAULFIELD RECONSIDERED. | Pater Familias