On this whole question of burning books, I'd like to offer a personal view. I think there could be a misunderstanding about how the writer regards his own work. My credentials are that I once wrote two comic novels of sufficiently high quality as to be taken by one of the most prestigious London publishers & to be praised by some of the toughest London reviewers. That's an uncharacteristically styleless thing to write & I only do so in support of my claim to know - from so many miles further down the mountain - how the thing could possibly look to someone in Salinger's position. From that very personal viewpoint, I suggest that the writer is really only interested in his present or future writing. Once the thing is done, it's gone & best forgotten. I read someone recently (who was it? Nabakov? or some other phoney?) who pointed out that only the writer knows what he set out to do - what he intended to capture. And how very far short, ALWAYS, he has failed in the attempt. So a book is never what one had hoped for. It's ALWAYS a disappointment - an embarassment even. It remains forever a source of pleasure to show off, as I've just been doing, about being a published writer, about one's reviews, about the deals one did for film rights or foreign rights or whatever. But the books themselves one cannot bear to think about, to open even. I'm sure when Salinger remembers those manuscripts in the vault his heart thumps with pleasure at one page of dialogue, a couple of good juxtapositions when he really rung the bell, one little mannerism that just caught the person, whatever... 'Yes,' he thinks, 'I can do it still & not one of those other bastards can...' But for the rest, I suspect it's just four or five tons of paper that he can't bear to throw away. And probably never wants to see again. Or have anyone else share in his disappointment. Scottie B.