WI J.D. Salinger does not become a recluse?

What if J.D. Salinger kept on publishing works instead of hiding in his mansion in New Hampshire? What impact do you think it would have on contemporary literature?

EDIT: Too late I realize, in the thread title, that it should be did, not does.
 
What if J.D. Salinger kept on publishing works instead of hiding in his mansion in New Hampshire? What impact do you think it would have on contemporary literature?

EDIT: Too late I realize, in the thread title, that it should be did, not does.

Personally I don't think Salinger was a great author. "Catcher in the Rye" is a bit redundant and cliched at times. Nevertheless, his reclusive nature probably added more cachet to his work than the work itself has warranted. So the better question might be "do authors who recluse themselves add or detract from the intrinsic quality of their works?"

The other great recluse of the 20th and 21st centuries is Thomas Pynchon. So far, besides some "spy photos", he's flown under the radar. Unlike Salinger, his many works stand on their own as exemplars of modern American fiction in the eyes of a wide range of critics. I often think that Pynchon's reclusive behavior has not changed the intrinsic perception of his work, but rather has elevated a desire to grasp the author's critical appraisal of his corpus.

In short: reclusivity may or may not benefit authors, depending on the public reputation of literary works.
 
Personally I don't think Salinger was a great author. "Catcher in the Rye" is a bit redundant and cliched at times. Nevertheless, his reclusive nature probably added more cachet to his work than the work itself has warranted. So the better question might be "do authors who recluse themselves add or detract from the intrinsic quality of their works?"

The other great recluse of the 20th and 21st centuries is Thomas Pynchon. So far, besides some "spy photos", he's flown under the radar. Unlike Salinger, his many works stand on their own as exemplars of modern American fiction in the eyes of a wide range of critics. I often think that Pynchon's reclusive behavior has not changed the intrinsic perception of his work, but rather has elevated a desire to grasp the author's critical appraisal of his corpus.

In short: reclusivity may or may not benefit authors, depending on the public reputation of literary works.

This, basically. I've come to believe that "Catcher in the Rye" is a book you like when you're 18, then you grow out of it.

If Salinger does keep publishing, I think the biggest determinant of his critical and popular perception (aside from the actual quality of his writing, of course) would be his position vis-a-vis the Sixties counterculture, which AFAIK is unknown. If he goes the Jack Kerouac route and becomes more conservative, he'll probably be criticized as a sellout. If he gets on the "right" side of issues like Vietnam, free love, etc., he'll most likely resemble Allen Ginsburg: a beloved figure even though his best work was all finished by 1956.
 
Not even if you're under 18. I despised Catcher in HS.
To get to the thread, I wonder what effect either of thos moves would have on his writing? It was dark, depressed and whiny as it was I could see it getting worse if he goes right and is seen as a sellout. If he goes left the popularity he gets could lead him to write as he was.
 
wasn't he a she? I loved the book when I read it 9th grade. besides we wouldn't have the movie Finding Forrester, another good thing to come from the recluse.
 
wasn't he a she? I loved the book when I read it 9th grade. besides we wouldn't have the movie Finding Forrester, another good thing to come from the recluse.

Citing IMDB, http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0181536/trivia, which probably is wrong (who knows), Salinger provides "influence" for the Mr. Forrester character. Not having seen the film I don't know if there are any clues from Catcher or Salinger's short stories. I'll refrain from comment about the specific character until watching the movie (out of microwave popcorn).

I'm not quite sure about the cachet of "recluse culture" in general. I lost one semi-recluse friend to suicide. Many are lonely, angry, and saddled with mental disorders. Romanticizing the condition could be detrimental -- after all most recluses aren't brilliant authors but many suffer mightily from the condition in complete anonymity. Perhaps more emphasis should be placed on the mental pathology of reclusivity and treatment options rather than romanticization of quasi-anonymous talent. Reclusivity is very often not an optimal lifestyle for the recluse. Reclusive behavior in turn negatively affects his/her family or caregivers and the community.
 
Top