By David Reagan, Contributing writer
Jan. 27 had a special feeling of importance this year. It had about it a specific air of solemn remembrance and quizzical intrigue for me. This was felt in the way that the beginning of a good mystery book makes a man want to flip straight to the ending and then go back to read the whole story.
I had only encountered this sort of puzzling urge a few times before: after a famous actor had died, I and seemingly the entire public, immediately rushed to read a bit of his or her biography and watch his movies. No matter that we were not personally related to or even friends with this person, it still aroused a respectful curiosity within that person’s followers. This is true for authors as well.
On Jan. 27, 2010 Jerome David Salinger, better known as J.D. Salinger, passed away at the age of 91 due to natural causes at his home in New Hampshire. This January marked the one-year anniversary of his death.
His death is significant because he was not only hailed as one of the greatest literary fiction writers of his day, but also because it left many to wonder what would happen to the rights of his books, specifically his most famous work “Catcher in the Rye.” Some of his other best known pieces are “Franny and Zooey,” “Raise the Roof Beam” and, of course, the short story collection “9 stories” which includes the well-known work “A Perfect Day for Bananafish.”
So what exactly did Salinger do to become this acclaimed hero of fiction writing? To understand that, you have to also understand that he accomplished more than just writing books. He shaped an entire decade, perhaps even an entire culture.
Today’s youth and readers of Salinger’s books may not fully understand why Salinger would be such an influential character in literature. To understand this, an appreciation for the time period in which it was written, not read, must be had. One must keep in mind that this book came out in 1951, only a few years before the young women and men alike began to worship James Dean in his famous Hollywood film “Rebel Without a Cause.” It was the age of rebellion – a complete transition from the way that previous generations had matured in society. Their parents, reserved and respectful, did not listen to that “devil” rock music and most certainly did not condone the growing normalcy of teenage drinking, smoking and cursing in society.
So now our confused youth are asking, “Teacher, why is this an important book?” Critics of the most recent decades have and will accuse the book “Catcher in the Rye” of a complete lack of literary value. I believe that if the magnifying glass is put down and the meaning of the bigger picture is looked at, one aspect of his writing will transcend all generations – his honesty. This is not only portrayed by how he writes, but what he writes.
Yes, today, any man can see the brutal honesty of the language used, but one must reflect upon the idea that its truthfulness was really in the content. Sure, the alcohol, profanity and sexual references are still jaw-dropping to us, but only to an extent these days. I have to imagine how it was a much bigger deal in the ’50s. Until the’90s, it was banned in many schools across the country throughout the decades. Some English teachers, who taught the book against school policy, were even fired. The most frequently censored book then is now one of the most often read classic books among high school students.
Salinger was, in a sense, considered the first person who actually stood up and admitted that this kind of behavior was happening and represented a voice for the rebellion which didn’t yet have a face. He finally put an abrupt end to all feigning of ignorance. He simply said it out loud. Apparently, it worked. “Catcher in the Rye” has sold over 65 million copies.
Other than his popularity for the previously mentioned book, the only other thing society remembers Salinger for is his hermit-like quality as he grew older. He bought an estate in Cornish, N.H. and built a tall fence around it. It is not currently known whether he continued writing after that. Nobody, even his family, could clearly say why his progression to reclusion happened. He became a mysterious personality, and the public took turns making their own guesses at his reasoning for withdrawing from society. Ironically, it seemed that, despite his distaste for public attention and this attempt to escape it, fans simply turned him into a famous enigma.
The J.D. Salinger Literary Trust was created in 2008 and the rights were “handed over” in the event of his death. Many have in the past wondered what exactly will become of his work in the case of his death, but even now the question has been met with vague answers from the publishers. This has been a commonly repeated question for both film producers and patrons in a quest to make a movie adaption of “Catcher in the Rye” and the elusive biography. Many attempts have been made, but a very offended Salinger always put a very swift end to any such idea because he thought each would only serve as a disgrace to the original content. In his swearing to never showcase any poor imitations which would never do justice to his work “Catcher in the Rye,” he once said that he would never fathom allowing anyone to play the main character other than himself.
Many have also attempted to make a biography of his life but were unsuccessful in this as well, including a man who tried to without permission and later lost in a U.S. Supreme Court case after Salinger sued him. Other than his daughter and an old lover’s informal account, no scholarly biography was ever made about Salinger’s life until Jan. 25 of this year, in a writing by Kenneth Slawenski.
There are many others in the making but undoubtedly must go through all the red tape first. It is unclear whether his trust will eventually ease up on the strict rules that the proclaimed “Father of Fiction,” imposed but it safe to say that it will be no easy battle, perhaps only attained by a “rebellion” of the people, ironically. According to conversation with The Hollywood Reporter, Salinger’s agent, Phyllis Westberg, declined to divulge the identity of the successor trustee(s), but she did indicate that the trust would continue to honor Salinger’s wishes.
Galvanized forever as an iconic figure in the literary world, the irony is not missed in the fact that his eccentric need to remain obscure is what finally procured his eternal popularity, multiplied by his final act of alienation in his death. His reclusion in his personal life finally leaves us with no other option other than to celebrate his works rather than him, a fact I believe was sought after and intended in every sense. If this is true, his death then is truly his last rebellion.