The Wonderful Mr. Bradley

Ray Bradley is unquestionably one of my all time favorite authors.  I honestly cannot think of a single piece of writing of his which I’ve read and not enjoyed.  Perhaps one of his most influential works to me was his collection of essays entitled Zen and the Art of Writing which served as a constant source of inspriation for me during my college years.  I think the man is an absolute creative genius and unquestionably one of the greatest authors of the 20th century.

That being said I was touched and pleased with The New York Times article “A Literary Legend Fights for a Library” by Jennifer Steinhauer.  Being employeed in a public library myself I always feel a ping of anxiety when I read about the closing of other libraries across the nation.  As such it is wonderful to hear about such devoted patronage from a man who has contributed so much in the realm of the material that libraries provide.

I cannot help but feel that the article contains a strong homage to Mr. Bradbury’s best known work, the famous and insightful Fahrenheit 451.  Both the context of closing libraries and Mr. Bradbury’s comments on the Internet (and his great dislike of it) strike me speaking a similar theme and fear of the destruction of books.  Is it a real concern or just tilting at windmills?  Can censorship also ultimately be possibly through the propogation of useless unintelligible junk theat gains more respect and following that that material of true knowledge and worth?  Things to think about.

Anyway, a great article about a great (albeit a bit eccentric) man.  He’d probably hate this blog post on the Internet.  Good for him.

Salinger and Caulfield and Lawsuits . . . Oh My?

Not too long ago I wrote here a bit about J.D. Salinger’s novel The Catcher in the Rye and the allure and popularity which has surrounded the story (and how I really am not that big a fan).  Well today I write a bit more about the Mr. Salinger and his famous novel. 

 I’ll direct you first to the article “Holden Caulfield, a Ripe 76, Heads to Court Again” by A. G. Sulzberger in The New York Times.  It seems that Mr. Salinger and his lawyers are pursuing a lawsuit against a Mr. Fredrik Colting (aka J. D. California) for copyright infringement for Mr. Colting’s novel 60 Years Later: Coming Through the Rye.  Now I haven’t read Mr. Colting’s book, so I can’t speak on all the specifics, but, from the above article it sounds like, the story of 60 Years Later: Coming Through the Rye relies on a number of similarities in plot to The Catcher in the Rye as well as utilizing a character named Mr. C who is heavily influenced on the fictional Holden Caulfield.  This is where the all the problems come into play.  Mr. Salinger’s lawyers claim that Mr. Coltings book is a “rip-off” of The Catcher in the Rye whereas Colting’s lawyers say that it is indeed an original work, especially considering that a ficticious J. D. Salinger is an important character in 60 Years Later: Coming Through the Rye.

Again, not having read Mr. Colting’s work I cannot say for sure how much or little he might be “ripping-off” The Catcher in the Rye.  What I can say however, is that the case seems to raise some questions of fictional ownership that i enjoy contemplating.  For a long time I have been somewhat skeptical (if not outright opposed to) the way in which our society seems to demand the “ownership” of fiction.  I’m not suggesting that all fiction is without creators, or even that people shouldn’t credit others for fictional origins or concepts, but moreso I would say that it seems a little bit ridiculous to suggest a complete ownership over this inmaterial of a fictional character or basic plot.  I understand that we value originality and the creative process, but to me a rethinking and a use of an already created character counts as originality and creativity.  To a certian degree I feel as if it would almost be better if authors of fiction pursued a bit of an “open source” mindset with their material.  That being, that they deserve credit for the original story and creation, but allow for the characters, plots, bits of the story to be used beyond their own work, by others who can also contribute to the originality of these works of fiction.  Of course it really seems to all be a money kind of conflict, which is unfortunate in my opinion, becuase that, much more than the reinterpretting of plots or characters, really strikes me as diminishing thevalue of the fictional work.

Beyond money, it is also part of that whole author function debate, which I could go on and on about for quite some time.  In the article it mentions how Mr. Salinger has refused to sell the rights to make a movie of The Catcher in the Rye, because he, as his agent says, “feels strongly that he wants his fiction and his characters to remain intact as he wrote them.”  Sure, that’s fine and good and all, especially considering that so many good books have been done an unjustice by being made into film, but the problem I have with it is this sense of ongoing ownership and control.  Personally I think that if Mr. Salinger wanted to keep his characters and fiction so safe to his vision then he never should have published in the first place.  I see this as a reality of the author of fiction.  The author has some control on guiding the plot and developing the characters, but really, once a story is made available to read, those plots and characters are open to all sorts of interpretation, contemplation and criticism regardless of whether the author likes it or not (or if they entirely adhere to the author’s original vision).  That being said, I respect Mr. Salinger’s wish not to have his book made into a movie, becuase that is his right, as the law and ownership stand.  But really I question the legitimacy of the lawsuit and am curious to see what the outcome will be.

Memories in “Ulysses”

I love The New York Times for many many reasons (great science articles, interesting political perspectives, etc.) but perhaps one of my favorite type of articles that often appear in the newspaper are the various editorials and op-eds.  For a great example I point you to Colum McCann’s “But Always Meeting Ourselves.”  The piece is a wonderful contemplation of a real life, of a famed novel (Specifically James Joyce’s Ulysses), and ultimately the power within a piece of fiction to draw out truths about those real lifes with live and interact with.  A beautiful little piece, that touched me greatly.  It also contians a wonderful quote by Vladamir Nobokov (no literary light-weight — think Lolita) about the power and purpose of storytelling (I’ll let you find the quote in the article yourself).

Breifly on Ulysses. I have never read the vast and well known Joyce novel myself, though, through discussion and having read about it, I know quite a bit of the plot and premise of the work.  It has for a time now been one of those books that I’ve been interested in picking up, and yet I am hesitant to do so.  A lot of what I have heard about Ulysses is that it is one of the most difficult and complex books in the English language, and that over the years it has spawned all sorts of analysis and criticism.  It is is such details of the book that both intrigue and discourage me.  Ultimately, I feel that I should read it out of principal alone(that being that I should challenge myself to read as many great novels as I can), which might not be the best of reasons to pick up a book, but I doubt it is also the worst.

That being said;  Happy Bloomsday today.

The Lasting Popularity of “The Catcher in the Rye”

The BBC offers an interesting article examining the long lasting popularity of J. D. Salinger’s The Catcher in the Rye.  I feel it is worth sharing here, considering that the popularity of the novel is unquestionable.

That being said, I personally really do not like The Catcher in the Rye.  I think my reason for this really comes down to two main things.  One, I didn’t read it in high school like so many other people.  In fact I did not read The Catcher in the Rye until the end of my junior year in college, and then I only read it because a couple of my friends insisted upon it (the reason I hadn’t read it up until then was due primarily to being uninterested in the book).  But anyways, I did finally read it, but ultimately was not all that impressed.  I won’t go so far as to say it was the worst book I have ever read (I have read quite a number of worse books) but there was nothing about it that really struck me as all that great, as so many people had  insisted it was.  In truth I found the novel overall rather smug and callous, which I realize is part of the characteristics of Holden Caulfield, the narrator, but still, in the end, it kind of annoyed me.

What further has made me have a dislike about the book is the name Holden Caulfield itself.  You see my middle name happens to be Holden and for as long as I can remember people have been say/asking to me “Oh, your middle name is named after Holden Caulfield?”

No, no it is not.  Holden is just a name that my parents liked.  In fact I don’t think my father has ever read The Catcher in the Rye himself, and I am pretty certain my mother has told me that she didn’t care for it when she read it.  I just hate the assumption that because part of my name is Holden that it must certainly be because of Holden Caulfield.  There are plenty of other people (real people might I add) who have Holden as part of their names and I am just as likely to take it from them.  Or, as is the actual case, it could be assumed to just be a liked name my parents picked.  The further annoyance with people making the comparison was that before I had read the book I wasn’t certain who Holden Caulfield was and so wasn’t  sure what people were talking about.

I’ll admit that part of my dislike might stem partially from a desire to be a contrarian in the popular literary field.  But really I think the two above points are my main reason.  I don’t begrudge others for liking The Catcher in the Rye it just isn’t really all that high up on my list of enjoyed books.