J. D. Salinger_ A Life - Kenneth Slawenski [188]
*Almost the entire issue of The New Yorker was devoted to “Seymour—an Introduction.”
*The contrast between Salinger and Keenan is fascinating. As Keenan was Salinger’s CIC partner, his wartime experience resembled Salinger’s more than anyone alive. Yet the two men’s reactions to the same events were vastly different. Salinger was torn apart by what he witnessed and spent the rest of his life weighing the deeper meanings that informed his experience. Keenan appears to have taken a noble but more detached approach. Upon returning home from the war, he joined the homicide division of the New York Police Department, in essence continuing the career he had begun with the Counter Intelligence Corps. Keenan’s attitude may have perplexed Salinger in 1950, when he wrote “For Esmé—with Love and Squalor,” but his friend served New York City well. He became chief detective of homicide for the City of New York and headed the infamous “Son of Sam” investigation in the 1970s.
*Burnett had held “A Young Man in a Stuffed Shirt” and “Daughter of the Late, Great Man” since 1945, when Salinger had submitted them for inclusion in the Young Folks anthology. This reminder of the events surrounding the anthology most certainly steeled Salinger’s determination to refuse Burnett’s request.
*Salinger’s reply to Bradford declining the book club deals was accompanied by an intriguing document. For some unstated reason, Salinger had compiled a list of his stories published between July 1941 (“The Hang of It”) and April 1950 (“For Esmé—with Love and Squalor”). This document lends itself to a suspicion that Salinger and Little, Brown were contemplating a future collection of Salinger stories, perhaps those related to the Second World War.
*In fact, Updike’s article, entitled “Anxious Days for the Glass Family,” was featured on the cover of The New York Times Book Review that Sunday, making it the most widely read of all Salinger reviews.
*Updike did recognize in his review that the presence of “Zooey” put to rest the misconception that Franny had been pregnant in the first story, concluding that “the very idea seems a violation of the awesome Glass ethereality.”
†The New York Times received considerable mail in reaction to Updike’s review of Franny and Zooey. On October 8, the newspaper printed a letter to the editor claiming to “correct some of the misstatements of fact and misleading implications” that Updike had presented. Updike himself answered the reproach in a long reply to the editor that proved his meticulous knowledge of Salinger’s works and his admiration for the author. He nonetheless defended his stance. “I should be sorry to believe that even the most ardent Salingerite could honestly regard my review as hostile. I did not mean it to be so and, on re-reading it, do not find it so.”
*Contemporary suspicion held that McCarthy’s tirade against Salinger also served as a personal attack against The New Yorker. The magazine had supported McCarthy with a first-rejection contract until that year, when it had allowed it to lapse. It was common knowledge that McCarthy was furious over the snub. When her article appeared, deriding the magazine’s star contributor, it was interpreted as revenge upon The New Yorker as much as a critique of Salinger. McCarthy admitted as much in a June 16, 1962, letter to William Maxwell.
*Actually, in 1961, Salinger did have a dog, which was photographed by a cameraman from Life magazine about the same time as the Time article appeared. Salinger’s reference to living in Westport with his dog was taken from his 1951 Catcher in the Rye interview with William Maxwell and refers to his beloved schnauzer, Benny. After Benny’s death, it may have been difficult for Salinger to find a suitable replacement, and the dog photographed by Life was still a puppy and ostensibly belonged to Peggy.
17. Detachment
On July 8, 1944, little more