Re: intelligence of the author vs. intelligence of the characters

Kim, as pure literature I think Catcher has a lot going for it, but to
be honest, any of the three other novels I mentioned have a lot more
going for it. I think the way a work affects readers -- and continues
to mean a lot to readers -- says about as much about the work as some
conception of literary merit (that we won't really be able to define).

I think the first chapter of Delillo's _Underworld_ is, word for word,
probably better writing than anything Salinger ever penned. But I don't
know how to even begin to argue for that. On what basis can you really
establish a comparison? And do the MFA's, then, on the lists I provided
earlier really not compare that well to Salinger (on a purely literary
basis, excluding nods to how much an author has influenced readers)?
Have you read them all as much as you've read Salinger?

Jim

Kim Johnson wrote:

> --- Jim Rovira <jrovira@drew.edu> wrote:
> > I actually feel the same way you do about Catcher
> > and the Glass stories (I
> > get a lot more out of the Glass stories). . .just,
> > if you want to judge
> > Salinger's influence, there's just no getting around
> > or beyond Catcher.
> >
>
> i don't really care about salinger's influence. that
> doesn't seem to me to be the real question. the real
> question is the caliber of the creative work, and not
> influence. a writer's worth should not be judged by
> the magnitude of his influencing others (bloom
> laughs.) 'the catcher' is excellent; it's too bad that
> it has overshadowed his other work.
>
> > It's really hard for me to compare Salinger to, say,
> > O'Connor and Carver,
> > although I agree he stands up well to both (and both
> > stand up well to
> > him). All three seemed to be coming from completely
> > different places.
> > There were other writers on the list that probably
> > do deserve the same kind
> > of attention Salinger gets just by the quality of
> > their writing, and then
> > there's John Irving -- who drives me nuts but I keep
> > finding myself reading
> > his novels.
>
> i agree the three are coming from different places,
> but they're all arrivng with the muse perched on their
> shoulders. yes, the other writers on the list deserve
> attention and readership.
>
>
> > Catcher is such an important cultural icon it's
> > really not a fair
> > comparison to say that people aren't doing
> > worthwhile work if they haven't
> > written a Catcher. Those types of novels just don't
> > come around often,
> > period. Rushdie's _Satanic Verses_ actually offers
> > me more than Catcher
> > does. So does Delillo's _Underground_. Or
> > Pynchon's _Gravity's Rainbow_.
> > But I'll bet anything someone offering a
> > undergraduate class in Salinger
> > would get quite a few more registrations than
> > someone offering a class in
> > Pynchon or Delillo (or both) -- and that most of the
> > students in it would
> > have already read at least one thing by the author.
> >
> > Jim
>
> that 'the catcher' has become a cultural icon detracts
> from assessing its literary worth. i don't believe
> that if a writer hasn't written a 'catcher' he isn't
> doing worthwhile work. we were engaged in the smug
> parlour game of rating writers.
> kim
>
>
> > Kim Johnson wrote:
> >
> > > --- James Rovira <jrovira@drew.edu> wrote:
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > What you did say in your previous post was that
> > > > those programs were a complete waste of time.
> > > > That's mistaken. If all you meant was that
> > they're
> > > > not for everyone, that's an odd way of saying it
> > --
> > > > it sounded like you meant they weren't for
> > anyone.
> > >
> > > in reading my last post i don't see that i said it
> > was
> > > a 'complete waste of time.' the post was an off
> > the
> > > cuff wondering if the mfa programs weren't all
> > that
> > > they were cracked up to be. that, given the
> > thousands
> > > of graduates, they hadn't produced someone on the
> > > level of a salinger. and i mention the question of
> > > temperment of the writer as a possible determining
> > > factor on how the mfa might affect him. but i'm
> > not
> > > fool enough to say that one wouldn't get anything
> > out
> > > of such a program. that would be absurd. (not that
> > > i've been in such a program...so you can discount
> > all
> > > i've said...) :)
> > >
> > > > I think you also need to broaden your conception
> > of
> > > > accomplishment if you're only willing to see
> > Raymond
> > > > Carver and Flannery O'Connor from the lists
> > below as
> > > > being "accomplished." It boasts of Pulitzer
> > and, I
> > > > think, Nobel prize winners -- honors I don't
> > think
> > > > Salinger ever won.
> > >
> > > no, i didn't say that no one else was
> > 'accomplished.'
> > > you asked me to identify those that were as
> > > accomplished as salinger. and i stick by my reply
> > > that, despite the 'awards', the only two writers
> > from
> > > your list on salinger's level are o'connor and
> > carver.
> > > but i'm not saying the others haven't accomplished
> > > anything. they're successful, creative writers
> > with
> > > wonderful vitaes, but not at the level of salinger
> > for
> > > my book-buying money.
> > >
> > >
> > > > I'm not sure that Nine Stories has much historic
> > > > significance outside the fact that it was
> > written by
> > > > Salinger. While Catcher spawn imitators, I
> > don't
> > > > think the stories did. I still think For Esme
> > and
> > > > Pretty Mouth are the best things Salinger ever
> > wrote
> > > > -- better than Catcher, even. You don't see
> > > > Salinger anthologized much at all these days,
> > > > though. That may be Salinger's decision, and if
> > > > that's the case, he's shooting himself in the
> > foot.
> > > > If all he wants to be remembered for is Catcher,
> > > > then that's the quickest way to do it....
> > > >
> > >
> > > ben yagoda, in his history of 'the new yorker'
> > gives a
> > > fairly good sense of the excitement salinger
> > caused in
> > > the late 40s, early 50s with his stories. but to
> > show
> > > you how flawed my sense of literary worth is, i
> > think
> > > the glass stories are better, more important, that
> > > 'the catcher.'
> > >
> > > kim
> > >
> > > __________________________________________________
> > > Do You Yahoo!?
> > > Yahoo! Finance - Get real-time stock quotes
> > > http://finance.yahoo.com
> > > -
> > > * Unsubscribing? Mail majordomo@roughdraft.org
> > with the message
> > > * UNSUBSCRIBE BANANAFISH
> >
> > -
> > * Unsubscribing? Mail majordomo@roughdraft.org with
> > the message
> > * UNSUBSCRIBE BANANAFISH
>
> __________________________________________________
> Do You Yahoo!?
> Yahoo! Finance - Get real-time stock quotes
> http://finance.yahoo.com
> -
> * Unsubscribing? Mail majordomo@roughdraft.org with the message
> * UNSUBSCRIBE BANANAFISH

-
* Unsubscribing? Mail majordomo@roughdraft.org with the message
* UNSUBSCRIBE BANANAFISH