Was Salinger Too Pure For This World?

Celia Cyanide · Sep 16, 2013

I found this NYT piece on facebook today. I haven't even heard about this doc. I am not exactly sure what I think about it, but it depresses me.

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/09/15/o...pure-for-this-world.html?pagewanted=1&_r=1&hp

IN the 50 years since J.D. Salinger removed himself from the public eye and stopped publishing, he has been viewed — more accurately, worshiped — as the human embodiment of purity, a welcome antidote to phoniness. To many, he was a kind of god.
Enlarge This Image

Eleni Kalorkoti

Now comes the word — though not really news, to some — that over the years when he was cherishing his privacy, Salinger was also carrying on relationships with young women 15, and in my case, 35 years younger than he.

“Salinger,” a new documentary film touches — though politely — on the story of just five of these young women (most under 20 when he sought them out), but the pattern was wider: letters I’ve received over the 15 years since I broke the unwritten rule and spoke of my own experiences with the man revealed to me that there were more than a dozen. In at least one case, Salinger was corresponding with one teenage girl while sharing his home with another: me.

One of these girls, 14 when Salinger first pursued her long ago, described him in terms usually reserved for deities, and spoke of feeling privileged to have served as inspiration and muse to a great writer — though she also reports that he severed their relationship the day after their one and only sexual encounter.

alleycat · Sep 16, 2013

The producer or director of the documentary was on Charlie Rose a couple of weeks ago. I think he tried to make a true and telling portrait of Salinger, but his glowing admiration for him must certainly have colored the film.

I can never quite come to admire or even like Salinger myself, although I will certainly give him credit as a writer.

Gale Haut · Sep 16, 2013

That kind of behavior doesn't sounded atypical of emotionally isolated people. Color me unsurprised. I still think his perspective is fascinating.

alleycat · Sep 16, 2013

This is a promo clip for the Charlie Rose segment I mentioned. I didn't see the full interview online, but I didn't really look that hard.

http://video.pbs.org/video/2365074247/

Alessandra Kelley · Sep 16, 2013

I find the excuses made for Salinger's decades of abusive behavior because he was a great artist to be insulting in the extreme.

Art is no excuse for using people for your emotional needs and wrapping them up in your personal worship, then cruelly discarding them.

It is the quiet acceptance, apparently alive and well in our culture, of the notion that genius justifies cruel or abusive treatment of those who serve the artist and his art. Richard Schickel, writing of Salinger’s activities, expresses the view that despite the disclosures about Salinger’s pursuit of young women he lived “a ‘normal’ life.”

“He liked pretty young girls. Stop the presses,” writes the film critic (and father of daughters) David Edelstein. The implication being, what’s the fuss?

As an artist this is infuriating. The ability to make art should not be a carte blanche to use people.

Although, I do wonder if it is a male artists' privilege. One hears much about the horrible, abusing lives of many prominent male artists, such as Picasso, Dalí, and Salinger, but a great deal less about female artists.

The film in question seems to have been dripping with sympathy for Salinger's trauma and lost innocence after the war. Rather less so for the children (one was 14!) and girls whose innocence he fed on to shore himself up.

Or as Joyce Maynard wrote,

It seems the myth survives in our culture still, that a young girl’s worth, measured against that of a great man, may be of lesser consequence.

Rina Evans · Sep 16, 2013

Abusive men have always been and always will be worshipped for their 'art'. John Lennon, F. Scott Fitzgerald. It's like it doesn't matter. Lewis Carroll... He took photos of naked kids, did he not?

Don · Sep 16, 2013

Let's not forget Roman Polanski, for whom we have seen apologias in this very forum.

Alessandra Kelley · Sep 16, 2013

Rina Evans said:
Lewis Carroll... He took photos of naked kids, did he not?

He did, and seems like Salinger to have been enamored of their innocence. The chief difference is he had the parents' supervision and permission and when he was done with the children Carroll didn't boot them out the door with a lecture on how utterly useless and awful they were.

Celia Cyanide · Sep 16, 2013

Don said:
Let's not forget Roman Polanski, for whom we have seen apologias in this very forum.

There were admittedly very few here compared to...well, everywhere else, but yes, there were some.

GeorgeK · Sep 16, 2013

Alessandra Kelley said:
As an artist this is infuriating. The ability to make art should not be a carte blanche to (ab)use people.
,

Corrected it for you.
Not a fan of Salinger

I got yelled at by an English teacher in HS when he asked, "What did you think of this book, George?"
"I get the feeling that the guy is a creepy pedophile. I didn't like the book."
"How did you get that feeling about the main character?" he questioned.
"Not the character, the author."
"What?!!

So, yeah, not surprised at this revelation

Celia Cyanide · Sep 16, 2013

Okay, so why DID you think that from reading the book?

GeorgeK · Sep 16, 2013

Celia Cyanide said:
Okay, so why DID you think that from reading the book?

He enjoyed too much writing about teenagers and sex and genital trauma.

Gale Haut · Sep 16, 2013

Appreciating his writing does not mean you have to condone the man's flaws.

Just putting it out there.

Zoombie · Sep 16, 2013

I feel suddenly vindicated for being the only person in Lit class who hated, HATED, Catcher in the Rye and HATED the main character. Seriously, every other teenager was like, "OMG, HOLDEN IS SO LIKE ME!"

And I kept saying, "But Holden is a TERRIBLE PERSON."

Celia Cyanide · Sep 16, 2013

Gale Haut said:
Appreciating his writing does not mean you have to condone the man's flaws.

Of course you don't have to do it, but clearly some people do.

Zoombie · Sep 16, 2013

But...on topic, I won't say this surprises me, because it actually does. While what you write often shows your inside...it doesn't have too. I am fully capable of writing characters who share completely opposing views of what I want in the world, I am capable of writing novels that present things that I don't want to have done or happen.

All of us are.

I really just thought his seclusion was due to him being...well, a bit weird.

But, lets be frank...

We're all talking to each-other using fancy speaky boxes strapped to minature type-writers, connected via cables that run on magic fairy dust for all we know.

WE ARE ALL WEIRD.

Still, it sucks that his weirdness had just plain nastiness hiding under it.

Gale Haut · Sep 16, 2013

Zoombie said:
But...on topic, I won't say this surprises me, because it actually does. While what you write often shows your inside...it doesn't have too.

Well, the reason I wasn't surprised had little to do with his writing and much more to do with how he chose to live after his divorce. It makes sense to me that a person who chooses to withdraw so completely from society would seek out unfulfilling relationships to vindicate some aspect of his ego without having the threat of a real commitment lingering.

My experience with Catcher in the Rye was a lot different than yours, too. I was the only student who liked it.

Celia Cyanide · Sep 16, 2013

Gale Haut said:
Well, the reason I wasn't surprised had little to do with his writing and much more to do with how he chose to live after his divorce. It makes sense to me that a person who chooses to withdraw so completely from society would seek out unfulfilling relationships to vindicate some aspect of his ego without having the threat of a real commitment lingering.

Isn't moving in with someone "the threat of a real commitment"?

Gale Haut · Sep 16, 2013

Celia Cyanide said:
Isn't moving in with someone "the threat of a real commitment"?

Semantics that we may likely disagree on given your current S&M avatar phase.

I see a real commitment as one that involves a more equal balance of powers and a helluva lot less manipulation. The actual point I was trying to make was that being emotionally guarded does not sound out of character based on what I know of him.

raburrell · Sep 16, 2013

Zoombie said:
I feel suddenly vindicated for being the only person in Lit class who hated, HATED, Catcher in the Rye and HATED the main character. Seriously, every other teenager was like, "OMG, HOLDEN IS SO LIKE ME!"

And I kept saying, "But Holden is a TERRIBLE PERSON."

With you 100%, Zoombie. HC is easily one of the most despicable characters in classic literature to me. It doesn't surprise me in the least to hear that Salinger had a few unsavory quirks of his own.

Celia Cyanide · Sep 16, 2013

Gale Haut said:
Semantics that we may likely disagree on given your current S&M avatar phase.

I'm just trying to understand what you mean. You're description of all of this sounds very innocent. "The threat of a real commitment," and "emotionally guarded." Just because he was a recluse doesn't make him innocent. I think that was the entire point of this editorial, including the title.

DancingMaenid · Sep 16, 2013

See, I like most of Salinger's work a lot, including The Catcher in the Rye. I've never understood the hatred that book gets, because I think Holden is an interesting, dynamic character.

But I enjoy Salinger's work more when I don't think too much about his philosophy and his possible intentions in writing. I think Salinger was obsessed with youth and innocence, and his spiritual beliefs were a major influence. Some of his writing can very much be interpreted with that in consideration, and it makes sense, but it makes his stories less relatable to me. For example, I love the character of Seymour Glass, but I prefer to see him as an intelligent but damaged man who's probably suffering from PTSD than as a guru who forsakes the world in favor of spiritual enlightenment.

Salinger could be very rigid in his beliefs, and it alienated some of his loved ones. My impression of him is that he believed that worldly connections tarnished the soul, and this made it difficult for him to maintain strong relationships or relate to other people. He had lofty ideals, but never really grasped how those ideals sometimes affected the other people in his life. (For example, his daughter's memoir claims that he was heavily influenced by Christian Science and discouraged his daughter from seeking medical care and his wife from seeking treatment for her post-partum depression.)

His relationships with much younger women can be creepy, to say the least. I wasn't familiar with the 14-year-old. I was mainly familiar with Joyce Maynard, who was in her late teens (and legal, I think) when she and Salinger got together. Even that is a little odd. I'm not sure Salinger had any predatory intentions, but I think he was idealized youth a lot and was fixated on it.

Raventongue · Sep 16, 2013

Rina Evans said:
Abusive men have always been and always will be worshipped for their 'art'. John Lennon, F. Scott Fitzgerald. It's like it doesn't matter.

It's true that they always have been, but I am hoping it's not true that they always will be. Someday, hopefully, there will be NO excuses accepted for being an abusive snot-rattle.

Celia Cyanide · Sep 16, 2013

DancingMaenid said:
His relationships with much younger women can be creepy, to say the least. I wasn't familiar with the 14-year-old. I was mainly familiar with Joyce Maynard, who was in her late teens (and legal, I think) when she and Salinger got together. Even that is a little odd.

I know what you mean. I guess I didn't realize there were so many. I can see it happening with one girl, but then it happens again with another girl while he's still living with the last one? From reading Ms Maynard's essay, it sounds like most, possibly all, of the girls thought they were the only one.

Gale Haut · Sep 16, 2013

Celia Cyanide said:
I'm just trying to understand what you mean. You're description of all of this sounds very innocent. "The threat of a real commitment," and "emotionally guarded." Just because he was a recluse doesn't make him innocent. I think that was the entire point of this editorial, including the title.

I would never suggest his role in these relationships to be innocent. He clearly had the most to gain and the least to lose:

EXCERPT said:
But we are talking about what happens when people in positions of power — mentors, priests, employers or simply those assigned an elevated status — use their power to lure much younger people into sexual and (in the case of Salinger) emotional relationships. Most typically, those who do this are men. And when they are done with the person they’ve drawn toward them, it can take that person years or decades to recover.

I am now 59. Let a man tell me now that I am of no worth or value, and never will be and the man will be diminished in my eyes. But when a man who had become for me the possessor of all wisdom told me these things, when I was 18, the one diminished was myself.

He sounds like the incarnation of a succubus to me.

Was Salinger Too Pure For This World?

Joker Groupie

Still around

waxing digital artistic

Still around

Sophipygian

All Living is Local

Sophipygian

Joker Groupie

ever seeking

Joker Groupie

ever seeking

waxing digital artistic

Dragon of the Multiverse

Joker Groupie

Dragon of the Multiverse

waxing digital artistic

Joker Groupie

waxing digital artistic

Treguna Makoidees Trecorum SadisDee

Joker Groupie

New kid...seven years ago!

little orphan anarchist

Joker Groupie

waxing digital artistic