This MedLibrary.org supplementary page on Talk:J. D. Salinger is provided directly from the open source Wikipedia as a service to our readers. Please see the note below on authorship of this content, as well as the Wikipedia usage guidelines. To search for other content from our encyclopedia supplement, please use the form below:
Related Sponsors
 |
J. D. Salinger has been listed as one of the Language and literature good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can delist it, or ask for a reassessment. | |||||||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||
| This article must adhere to the policy on biographies of living persons. Controversial material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted or if there are other concerns relative to this policy, report it on the living persons biographies noticeboard. |
|
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||
 Archives |
| /archive1 |
Public Domain - Not!
The links to stories allegedly in the public domain should be deleted. That is a Hungarian pirate site and the stories copied there are emphatically not in the public domain. 75.58.118.171 (talk) 17:09, 26 May 2008 (UTC)
- I agree. No way are those works PD in Hungary. I removed the external links to unless someone can point to what exemption in Hungary law allows the work of a living person into the public domain. --JayHenry (talk) 01:44, 27 May 2008 (UTC)
Those works are in the public domain in the U.S. I searched the renewal records for J.D. Salinger and could not find renewal notice for any of the three. Since they were published prior to 1963 without renewal that makes them public domain. You are more than welcome to sit down at your local library and check yourself, but you will come to the same conclusion. I cannot vouch for what else that website offers, but those are valid public domain titles.
Date of Catcher
I'm looking at a paperback copy of Catcher in the Rye. It says, Copyright 1945, 1946, 1951. Renewed 1979. How did Salinger get it copyrighted in 1945 if it's a 1951 novel, as this article says? Friendly Person (talk) 01:44, 28 September 2008 (UTC)
Review from Scartol
As promised, here is my review. I'm doing some copyediting as I read, but there are certain spots where I'm not sure how to adjust the writing.
- During the second semester of the class, Burnett saw some degree of talent in the young author. This is pretty vague, but I'm not sure how to adjust it. Did he commend Salinger on his writing? Did he offer to provide more in-depth reviews? Did he urge him to publish? Etc.
Done
- The bit about their estrangement needs a citation. Done
- I'm not sure how to feel about the cruise ship bit. It's interesting, but it feels very much out of place in the WWII subsection. The previous paragraph dovetails nicely into the war, and the cruise ship info really breaks that up. Done; I moved it in between the Oona stuff and the first mention of WWII, where it ought to have been, anyway.
- I know it gets tedious using "he" over and over again, but "the writer" is distracting and I've replaced it. (It's especially difficult later on, when discussing more than one writer.)
- I've removed the phrase "according to Hemingway biographer Carlos Baker", because it didn't seem necessary. I added a citation to the quote it preceded. I reinserted the "according to"; I actually think it's crucial, because otherwise, readers may get the impression that what follows is a direct quote from Salinger's letter to Hemingway. It's not; Salinger won't allow any of his letters to be published, so Baker was forced to rephrase what he said. Whatever we know of the letter is, quite literally, according to Baker.
- He was also among the first soldiers to enter a liberated concentration camp. This sentence seems very significant and could use a bit more in it. Do any of the bios mention anything about what he said about it? Unfortunately, they don't; this revelation was presented for the first time by Margaret in her 2000 memoir, and no book-length biographies have been published in the intervening 7 years. To me, it is understandable that Salinger—already mum on so many other topics—would keep mum about this.
- Just a note for future reference: When writing about historians or biographers, it's good to use the literary present. To wit: "His biographers speculate…".
- For future reference: A few spots misuse punctuation with quotation marks. See WP:MOS#Quotation_marks.
Release_and_influence_of_The_Catcher_in_the_Rye
- I suggest shortening the subsection title to The Catcher in the Rye. Done
- Uhh. Sparknotes as a reliable source? Isn't there a book analyzing Catcher which we could refer to instead? (As an English teacher I loathe SparkNotes.)
- The quote referring to "immorality and perversion" (critical reception) is from Hamilton; is that his assessment? Or is he quoting another source? A casual reader will probably assume the former, so let's clarify. Done; The footnote now explains that the quote is taken from The Christian Science Monitor.
- In the seventies, several U.S. high school teachers were "fired or forced to resign for having assigned" the book… Why is this part quoted? If it's not essential to preserve the original wording, it's better to rephrase it. Done
That's it for now. It's a very good article, as I've said. More to come! – Scartol • Tok 01:11, 24 November 2007 (UTC)
Writing in the fifties and move to Cornish
- In July 1951, his friend and New Yorker editor William Maxwell in Book of the Month Club News asked Salinger about his literary influences. This is confusing. Did he pose the question in an article? Or was it part of an interview? If the latter, better to say: "In a July 1951 interview in Book of the Month Club News, Salinger's friend…". Done
- I don't think entire sentences should be put in parentheses except in rare occasions. (It's distracting and usually unnecessary.) Done
- …Salinger wrote friends of "something momentous [making] an appearance in his life." My feeling is that it's best to quote from a biographer only when it's absolutely necessary, and then it needs to be attributed in the sentence text. If it's anyone other than Salinger being quoted, best to indicate as much in the sentence. The same applies to "remarkably so for a volume of short stories". Done
- I like the phrase "tightening his grip on publicity". Good call.
- Earlier you linked to Manhattan, New York, but in this section you link to Cornish, New Hampshire. It should be consistent one way or another. Done
- I'd like to know who said "in splendid prominence". Done; It was Hamilton, and didn't need to be quoted.
More to come! – Scartol • Tok 01:57, 24 November 2007 (UTC)
Last_publications_and_relationship_with_Joyce_Maynard
- I'm a fan of shorter section names and this one is a doozy. Maybe: "Last publications and Maynard relationship"? Done
- The "Glass family series" reference is unclear to me. Did I miss something, or is this a reference without a clear antecedent? Done
- …he felt he could not stand the reality of children again (as opposed to the fantasy children in his writings). This is unclear. How about: "…(he preferred the fantasy children in his writing)."? Done; I looked up the source (added by someone else), and realized that all of the "fantasy children" stuff was an observation of Margaret's; Salinger actually told her he was "too old." I've replaced the whole phrase with that.
Later_years_and_instances_of_exposure
- Is "instances of" necessary in the title? Done
- I moved it, but note that left-aligned images should go above sub-section headings. See WP:MOS#Images. Done
- I think it's best to choose either "Margaret" or "Ms. Salinger" and then stick to it. Done
Two more sections. I'll finish those today, I expect. – Scartol • Tok 14:51, 24 November 2007 (UTC)
- I don't know that we need to start fiddling with the larger structure at this time, but if/when you prepare this for FA (and I hope you will), you should separate style and themes into two different sections.
- Who provides the quote: …were also affected by "Salinger's voice and comic timing."? I read it as a Roth quote. Let's clarify. Done
Finally: In the Bibliography section, I'd remove the Geocities links. I'd say they belong in the External Links section (if anywhere – many editors are uneasy about GC pages). 
Done; I've removed them from the bibliography, but kept a link to the site in External Links. It's one of the few Salinger web sites I know of that actually has content (it has all of his high school newspaper columns and several rare interviews, along with summaries of his unpublished stories.)
Thanks for bringing me in on this project – please let me know if you have any other questions or concerns. Good luck with it! – Scartol • Tok 15:55, 24 November 2007 (UTC)
- I have made some of your suggested changes (and addressed others), with more to come. Thanks! Hobbesy3 (talk) 12:02, 27 November 2007 (UTC)
I believe I have made or addressed all your suggested changes, except for one. You asked that I replace the two SparkNotes references, but the trouble is the passage for which they are the source:
| “ | The book is more notable for the persona and confessional voice of its first-person narrator, Holden. Holden serves as an insightful but unreliable narrator who expounds on the purity of childhood, the "phoniness" of adulthood, and his own alienation and loss of innocence. | ” |
These are such blanket, overarching observations about Holden and the nature of the novel that I'm having a hard time finding a reputable (and non-summary, non-encyclopedic) source that mentions all this in a way that can be sourced. Like, I'd probably be able to find these observations in a book about Catcher, but I'd have to read the whole book to get them all. Do you have any suggestions, or would you be willing to find a source? Thanks, Hobbesy3 (talk) 03:27, 30 November 2007 (UTC)
- I'll take a close look at the changes soon – probably this weekend, but I can't make any promises. Meantime, I've found a book (ISBN 0816188947) which should be of use. I'll probably be able to replace the SparkNotes stuff. – Scartol • Tok 03:43, 30 November 2007 (UTC)
-
-
- Also, just for fun, I noticed the NY Times still has its initial reviews of Catcher up: Ah, the World's a Crumby Place and Books of the Times. Probably best to just include those as external links on Catcher though... --JayHenry (talk) 05:05, 30 November 2007 (UTC)
-
-
-
-
-
- Okay, I've cleansed the piece by changing the SporkNotes stuff to a critical essay. I do believe I've done what I came here to do. Good luck with this (I can't imagine it won't pass GA this time), and do let me know if you have any other questions or concerns. – Scartol • Tok 17:10, 1 December 2007 (UTC)
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
- Excellent! Thanks, Hobbesy3 21:46, 1 December 2007 (UTC)
-
-
-
-
Salinger studying education
Salinger seems to have been a disinterested student based on what Hamilton says, and what is on this page now suggests he had no intention of obtaining a degree. However, at least one source ( Donald M. Fiene: "A Bibliographical Study of J. D. Salinger: Life, Work, and Reputation," M.A. Thesis, University of Louisville, 1962)does say he considered studying special education--maybe to be a teacher eventually. Among other things referenced are the college transcipts. Seeing how Salinger's character's Buddy Glass and his brother Seymour were teachers (I think Zooey was encouraged by someone to be one too), and Holden visits two in the course of his journey in Catcher in the Rye, it doesn't seem unlikely this would be a field that interested him. Also, the possibility he did consider special education as a field is believable, especially after reading Elaine and Teddy. Anyway, I went back in and added this as a detail during his NYU days.
LewWasserman9 01:22, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
I just have to add one tid bit...This is helpful I hope Another influenced by Salinger's style was Jack Kolinsky a teenage writer who recently won the Bishop prize (by recently I mean over fifteen years ago) I think this deserves an honorable mention...Hmm? Thoughts anyone. He can't be found on google interestingly enough... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.78.31.117 (talk) 01:00, 21 May 2008 (UTC)
Swami Vivekananda and Sri Ramakrishna influence prior to Paramahansa Yoganda
Could someone please clear up the religion aspect? Salinger is a student of a form of Vivekananda's Vedanta, this is confirmed in both his Daughter's and Joyce Maynard's memoirs as well as some themes in his fiction, and his reclusive way of life outside of his work*. [*NOTE: I have refined this statement as it is incorrect in the sense of Vedanta being long-term in Salinger's life, which I explain below in my response to JayHenry]. Also, the Scientology information is misleading as it was a passing fad for him at most based on information about his life.
- His religion is already discussed in the article at some length, and by reviewing the footnotes, one can see that the relevant portions of Margaret Salinger's and Joyce Maynard's biographies (and several other biographies) are already cited. Further, I don't understand what part of the article you feel is misleading about Scientology. The article here never suggests that he did anything other than try out Dianetics as one of a series of religions. In other words: it is already quite clear to me from reading the article that it was a passing fad, and not something significant or something to which he is believed to still adhere. --JayHenry (talk) 05:37, 16 July 2008 (UTC)
My Response to Jay Henry : Here is a Selection of Relevant Quotes on Salinger's pre-marital religious influences , and relatable links to his fiction.
Margaret Salinger, Dreamcatcher, pg. 12:
"Claire would stay the night with him on those black sheets, but they were not intimate. Jerry was very involved with Vivekananda's Vedanta center at the time, she told me, and as his character Teddy said, meeting a woman was heading in the wrong direction for enlightenment. Sri Ramakrishna, Swami Vivekananda's guru and predecessor, expressed the same opinion, though more forcibly, in his book The Gospels of Sri Ramakrishna (which my father sent to his British publisher, Hamish Hamilton, as the only thing worth reading)..."
Now in the quote below, I discover I am incorrect as far as Vedanta and The Gospels of Sri Ramakrishna being long-term beliefs with Salinger. I want to clear up that confusion first, and then continue to focus on the relevance both teachings did have in Salinger's life before Paramahansa Yoganda came into the picture:
Margaret Salinger, Dreamcatcher, pg. 86:
"..my father had found a new guru with a message that appeared to reconcile the conflict between earthly attraction and heavenly renunciation. According to the teachings of this guru, Paramahansa Yogananda, women and gold, the two enemies of enlightenment and karmic progress, were transmuted from Ramakrishna's bags of "phlegm, filth, and excreta" into something potentially holy. Marriage, for the first time in my father's postwar study of religion, was held out as something potentially sacred rather than automatically defiling."
According to Margaret Salinger--and what she writes her mother telling her--Salinger basically changed course into the teachings of Paramahansa Yoganda and dropped Vedanta somewhere in-between dating Claire Douglas prior to their wedding. This is further explained in the quote below, from the same page:
"During the fall and winter evenings prior to Jerry and Claire's wedding, they had been reading a miscellany not of Vedanta, as Seymore had prior to his marriage, but rather, Paramahansa Yogananda's book Autobiography of a Yogi."
I stand corrected as far as Paramahansa Yogananda's teachings replacing Vivekananda's Vedanata and Sri Ramakrishna in Salinger's life. I was confused and thought it was the opposite. BUT, I argue his study in Vedanta and Sri Ramakrishna before this described change (or progression) to Autobiography of a Yogi is of noteworthy interest and should be inclouded in the article. Especially since there are links to some of Salinger's fiction with those influences, and that it sheds further light into his pre-marital relationship and mindset in that time period. The article only talks about the discovery of Paramahansa Yogananda's book and its aftermath.
Further example of these links in his fiction before Paramahansa Yogananda:
Margaret Salinger, Dreamcatcher, pg. 77:
[about Salinger's short story De Daumier-Smith's Blue Period ]"...The first two students are an embodiment, almost a caricature, of what Sri Ramakrishna, whose work my father was studying deeply at the time, referred to as the excreta of "woman and gold"."
Margaret Salinger, Dreamcatcher, pg. 89:
"..I am convinced were it not for the teachings of Lahiri Mahasaya*, that neither their marriage nor my birth would have taken place at all, so caught up was my father in the teachings of Ramakrishna. The teachings of Yoganda held out to my father the possibility...of marriage as an institution not hopelessly defiling, setting back one's karmic progression many lifetimes (recall Teddy's comment about a woman being responsible for his having been reincarnated in an American body)."
[*Note: Lahiri Mahasaya (1828 -1895) was Yogananda's guru, his stories inter-connect with Autobiography of a Yogi ]
All of this amounts to valid historical context into Salinger's life, and to some degree his fiction.
The wikipedia article, by the way, appears to be incorrect in the highlighted portion of this quote: "Margaret Salinger wrote in her memoir DreamCatcher that she believes her parents would not have married – nor would she have been born – had her father not read the teachings of a disciple of Paramahansa Yogananda."
Who was the "disciple"? Autobiography of a Yogi is written by Paramhansa Yogananda--and is the only book mentioned in Dreamcatcher associated with that religious philosophy. The mangled sentence in the quote incorrectly suggests some alternative literature by some "disciple" of Yogananda being the driving force behind Salinger's interest.
As for Scientology--though it's certainly a much smaller issue than my main suggestions--I think it's more accurate to say Salinger became disenchanted with Dianetics. I feel as it reads now it's slightly open-ended. At least from Dreamcatcher, Claire Douglas is quoted as saying, " He soon became disenchanted with that..."(pg. 94).
I can also acquire more quotes related to Vedanta and possibly Sri Ramakrishna in Joyce Maynard's book, as well as Ian Hamilton's and another biography that I'm sure mentions it is by Warren French, titled "J.D. Salinger Revisted". However, I think the Dreamcatcher quotes are more than sufficient. What's curious to me is how some of those quotes already cited in footnotes have not been used completely, or have been too heavily edited, so as to not reveal the full back-story contrasting Salinger's introduction to Autobiography of a Yogi. It's a biographical crime to ignore these key details.
In a matter totally unrelated to the editing I suggest for the article...A tangent I think is interesting to explore just as one curious reader to another, is these ever-changing beliefs being a psychological cult phenomenon in Salinger's post-war years. It is suggested somewhat expansively in Dreamcatcher pg. 96-107 and leaves room for a lot of thought. However, it is also very difficult to say where one Eastern sprituality quest really ends or begins with Salinger, I believe there are many elements in his reclusive mode of life that still mirror Vedantic Karma Theory, for example. And deeper elements in some of his fiction than Margaret Salinger grazes.
- I've made some changes to address your concerns and will make some more later. The "disciple" of Yogananda was Lahiri Mahasaya--as you note, Mahasaya was actually the guru and so I have fixed the error. As for Vedanta and Vivekananda are already the focus of the second paragraph in this section, so I don't know how you can justify your claim that there's a "biographical crime". Those details are not ignored!! Re: scientology, I have added the word "disenchanted" per your request--I respectfully disagree that this was open ended before, but since it gave you that impression I have changed to your desired wording. --JayHenry (talk) 06:31, 17 July 2008 (UTC)
GA pass
This is a very good article on Salinger. Here are my suggestions for improvement beyond GA:
- There isn't a ton of scholarship written on Salinger's works, but there is some. It would be a good idea to use more of that to discuss his literary style and the themes of his works. Books such as The Catcher in the Rye: New Essays would be particularly helpful, I think. Biographers tend to use what is called "biographical criticism" (it is one way of interpreting literature) - we want to make sure we don't leave out the other interpretations of his work. I see the article has some critics from the 1960s as well, but all of this could be expanded using more research.
- I would delete the infobox. Infoboxes are optional and the "influences" fields here are a bit out of control. Readers should be presented with that information in context, where it makes sense (I like the "Influences" section, by the way). A text-heavy box also detracts from the image.
- He started his freshman year at New York University in 1936 (purported to have considered studying special education) but dropped out the following spring. - parenthetical is confusing
- The two writers began corresponding; according to Hemingway biographer Carlos Baker, Salinger wrote Hemingway in July 1946 that their talks "had given him his only hopeful minutes of the entire war". - confusing - Baker's or Salinger's words?
- Salinger had confided to several people that he felt Holden Caulfield deserved a novel - confusing - remind the reader that Salinger wrote about Holden before this time
- There is some minor overlinking of obvious words like "sue" - see WP:MOS-L for advice on linking.
Overall, this is an excellent article and I have no doubt that it can become an FA with a bit more research and refinement. Awadewit | talk 01:15, 5 December 2007 (UTC)
- I've made the last three of your six suggested changes. Hobbesy3 (talk) 16:59, 9 December 2007 (UTC)
He brought her to the United States, but the marriage fell apart after eight months and Sylvia returned to Germany. ------please clairfy--Shawnlandden (talk) 08:37, 8 January 2008 (UTC)
A break in reclusiveness
Given how infamous Salinger is for refusing to meet his fans, would it be worthwhile to mention the following event:
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=10841242
? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.237.89.173 (talk) 19:36, 20 January 2008 (UTC)
J.D.Salinger, Date of Photograph
The photograph of Salinger captioned "Salinger in 1953" is the same photograph that was printed on the back of the first edition of "Catcher in the Rye". It therefore dates back to at least July 1951. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.13.17.221 (talk) 10:14, 10 February 2008 (UTC)
JDS Early Life, Absurd ethnicity
"Jerome David Salinger was born in [[Manhattan, New York - he was half-Scottish and half-Irish.[1] His father, Sol Salinger, was a Jewish man of Polish origin who sold kosher cheese."
Hello, how on earth can JDS be half-Scottish and half-Irish and have a Jewish father of Polish descent?
Trefalcon (talk) 01:49, 18 April 2008 (UTC)
- The article had been vandalized so this didn't make any sense. It should have read that his mother was half-Scottish and half-Irish. I've fixed it so it's logical again. --JayHenry (talk) 02:02, 18 April 2008 (UTC)
Thanks --Trefalcon (talk) 01:49, 18 April 2008 (UTC)
Colbert
Salinger has been mentioned on Colbert, he claiming that he will somehow get the recluse on his show. I suggest a vandelism lock in preemption.67.175.90.197 (talk) —Preceding comment was added at 03:55, 1 May 2008 (UTC)
I too vote for protection. ThreeOneFive (talk) 17:21, 1 May 2008 (UTC)
Page protection shouldn't be used pre-emptively, you see. You should wait until vandalism occurs to warrant it. Powerslave (talk|cont.) 01:03, 21 June 2008 (UTC)
FA push
I think this has been sitting around close to FA status for long enough. I'd like to make that final push to get it across the line. Does anyone have any suggestions on how the section on Literary style and themes should best be expanded or subdivided? I think the other sections of the article are satisfactory. --JayHenry (talk) 18:01, 6 July 2008 (UTC)
- I asked María, an experienced editor with literature projects, for some suggestions. Here was her advice:
Salinger is looking great, and I think an FA push is definitely in its near future, but I agree that the themes need expanded. First of all, I would separate the style details from the thematic. Salinger's style(s) is sufficiently explained, I feel, but the common themes need to be better described and in more detail. This sentence is key: Recurring themes in Salinger's stories also connect to the ideas of innocence and adolescence, including the "corrupting influence of Hollywood and the world at large", the disconnect between teenagers and "phony" adults, and the perceptive, precocious intelligence of children. What else can be said about each? It would be great if subsections on each of these important themes could be developed. For example, the struggle through adolescence to adulthood as a theme: what role does it play in various works and what critical insight is there about it, specifically? It's like pulling teeth, but explicit examples from the works would help.
I took a quick look at some sources at Netlibrary and found Harold Bloom's J.D. Salinger's The Catcher in the Rye, which has a section dedicated to thematic and structural analysis, which may be of help. That's where I got my above example from, in fact. If you'd like more suggestions for sources, just let me know and I'll put my reference librarian game face on. There isn't much, but there is some stuff out there. María (habla conmigo) 19:31, 6 July 2008 (UTC)
Influence on Popular Culture
I have noticed that the article does not make mention of Salinger's influence on modern pop culture, specifically when it comes to W.P. Kinsella's novel, Shoeless Joe. This novel went on to become, of course, the motion picture Field of Dreams which, unfortunately, does not mention Salinger. ArtemusDark (talk) 18:42, 28 July 2008
Bot report : Found duplicate references !
In the last revision I edited, I found duplicate named references, i.e. references sharing the same name, but not having the same content. Please check them, as I am not able to fix them automatically :)
- "mehr" :
- {{cite news |last=Mckinley |first=Jesse |url=http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9F0DE2DD1330F932A15752C1A96E958260 |title=Iranian Film Is Canceled After Protest By Salinger |publisher=[[The New York Times]] |date=1998-11-21 |accessdate=2007-04-05}}
- {{cite news |last=Mckinley |first=Jesse |url=http://select.nytimes.com/search/restricted/article?res=F00713FC38540C728EDDA80994D0494D81 |title=Iranian Film Is Canceled After Protest By Salinger |publisher=[[The New York Times]] |date=[[1998-11-21]] |accessdate=2007-04-05 |format= fee required}}
DumZiBoT (talk) 18:16, 1 August 2008 (UTC)
"Recent privacy invasions"?
This heading doesn't seem NPOV, and may violate BLP with respect to those alleged to violate his privacy. --NE2 05:16, 5 August 2008 (UTC)
- I agree that this section should have a different title. Do you have any suggestions? I'll try to brainstorm some myself. --JayHenry (talk) 05:26, 5 August 2008 (UTC)
Wikipedia content modification information:
- This page was last modified on 28 September 2008, at 01:45.
Wikipedia Authorship and Review
Wikipedia content provided here is not reviewed directly by MedLibrary.org. Wikipedia content is authored by an open community of volunteers and is not produced by or in any way affiliated with MedLibrary.org.
Wikipedia Usage Guidelines
This article is licensed under the GNU Free Documentation License. It uses material from the Wikipedia article on "Talk:J. D. Salinger".
The URL for this specific entry is:
All Wikipedia text is available under the terms of the GNU Free Documentation License. (See Copyrights for details). Wikipedia® is a registered trademark of the Wikimedia Foundation, Inc.