Rereading
Salinger has been an author that doesn't like to give us a lot of information. Most of the stories that he writes show the reader something and don't really explain it - he leaves a lot up to interpretation. However, with some of his stories, particularly "A Perfect Day for Bananafish" and "Teddy", the interpretations that he leaves for us are hidden in the text, only to be truly understood upon a closer inspection after the story is over. With these two stories in particular, you almost haven't truly read the story until you've read them twice.
With "A Perfect Day for Bananafish", Salinger begins by describing a phone call between Muriel and her mother. Based off of the descriptions given of Muriel throughout the conversation, upon a first read the reader is likely to assume that the mother is overreacting and over-worrying about something, as mothers often do. A lot of what goes on between the two of them, for example the, "funny business with the trees", are unclear in meaning, but as readers we can tell that something happened. However, Salinger isn't telling us what happened. He doesn't have a narrator explaining what the funny business with the trees was, only us, looking in from the outside at this phone call. And then, after watching the phone call, and later the man in question, Seymour, for a while, Seymour shoots himself and the story ends. However, this ending is more of a beginning to the real story that has been veiled in the text the entire time. Going back through, readers can begin to recognize these vague descriptions as possible references to Seymour's attempts at killing himself. "Staying between the lines", the lines of the road. The "funny business with the trees", perhaps crashing the car into a tree. The second read really adds a lot to the story - I would argue that one cannot truly understand this story without reading it twice.
Similarly, in "Teddy", we get a lot of strange and vague descriptions of things, stuck as mere observers rather than having a true understanding of what is going on. Teddy is a very strange character from the beginning, but until his conversation with Nicholson, I had a hard time placing my finger on why. There are a lot of strange descriptions of things as well, the "it" that will either happen today or at some point when Teddy is 16, for example. However, once we realize Teddy's relationship with the world, as well as get a sense of confirmation of his words from the ending, these seemingly small sections of the story get much larger. You really need the full context of what is happening to understand what is going on, being a simple observer without this knowledge. Salinger is forcing us to read the story once more in order to satisfy our craving to understand what is going on.
Salinger's stories have all kept us as observers, but these two stories in particular force the reader to read the story again to get a sense of being more than an observer, or to even understand what is going on at all. I find it very interesting that these two stories both begin and end Nine Stories. Perhaps they are even more connected than meets the eye - maybe Nine Stories itself is a book that needs to be read twice through to truly be understood.
With "A Perfect Day for Bananafish", Salinger begins by describing a phone call between Muriel and her mother. Based off of the descriptions given of Muriel throughout the conversation, upon a first read the reader is likely to assume that the mother is overreacting and over-worrying about something, as mothers often do. A lot of what goes on between the two of them, for example the, "funny business with the trees", are unclear in meaning, but as readers we can tell that something happened. However, Salinger isn't telling us what happened. He doesn't have a narrator explaining what the funny business with the trees was, only us, looking in from the outside at this phone call. And then, after watching the phone call, and later the man in question, Seymour, for a while, Seymour shoots himself and the story ends. However, this ending is more of a beginning to the real story that has been veiled in the text the entire time. Going back through, readers can begin to recognize these vague descriptions as possible references to Seymour's attempts at killing himself. "Staying between the lines", the lines of the road. The "funny business with the trees", perhaps crashing the car into a tree. The second read really adds a lot to the story - I would argue that one cannot truly understand this story without reading it twice.
Similarly, in "Teddy", we get a lot of strange and vague descriptions of things, stuck as mere observers rather than having a true understanding of what is going on. Teddy is a very strange character from the beginning, but until his conversation with Nicholson, I had a hard time placing my finger on why. There are a lot of strange descriptions of things as well, the "it" that will either happen today or at some point when Teddy is 16, for example. However, once we realize Teddy's relationship with the world, as well as get a sense of confirmation of his words from the ending, these seemingly small sections of the story get much larger. You really need the full context of what is happening to understand what is going on, being a simple observer without this knowledge. Salinger is forcing us to read the story once more in order to satisfy our craving to understand what is going on.
Salinger's stories have all kept us as observers, but these two stories in particular force the reader to read the story again to get a sense of being more than an observer, or to even understand what is going on at all. I find it very interesting that these two stories both begin and end Nine Stories. Perhaps they are even more connected than meets the eye - maybe Nine Stories itself is a book that needs to be read twice through to truly be understood.
I agree that there is a lot of information in these stories that doesn't quite make sense until the ending, and even then is open to some interpretation. I think that especially in "Teddy" there are a lot of vague comments that we eventually learn could be referring to Teddy's own prediction of his death. I think that the same thing happens in "The Laughing Man" when we have to interpret the ending using some clues throughout the story. The laughing man story ends abruptly and everything changes in a way that the Comanches don't quite understand, but we can understand it better because of some clues that didn't quite make sense on the first read through the story.
ReplyDeleteI like this post a lot! It totally makes sense – rereading "Bananafish" and "Teddy" in light of both of their endings puts a whole new perspective on it. For example, in "Uncle Wiggily in Connecticut", we think Eloise is conceited and high-class until the end, where she forces Ramona to sleep in the middle of her bed. This gives us a whole new perspective about why she keeps talking about Walt, and her psyche throughout.
ReplyDeleteI completely agree, and the fact that we feel compelled to reread the story after we realize the ending to find all of the clues that were buried throughout the story is a sign of good writing. I love that you used Teddy as an example since his entire character is so compelling and I personally read "Teddy" several times trying to completely understand him. Great post!
ReplyDelete"A Perfect Day for Bananafish" and "Teddy" were both two of my favorite short stories. The way the stories slowly unfolded and surprised us at the endings intrigued me to reread the stories over and over again. The vagueness of Salinger's writing can be frustrating at first but I've realized that it adds so much more depth because of all the interpretations one can make of the events.
ReplyDeleteI agree! A lot of the endings in Nine Stories seem super abrupt and ambiguous, but Salinger laces subtle clues throughout his stories. I think it makes the readings more intriguing, and it's really interesting to hear other people's thoughts on the endings and talk about it.
ReplyDeleteMuch of the information that explains Teddy's talk with the man on the deck is given to us early in the story and does not connect with what Teddy is saying until a second reading. Many readers will forget Teddy's little notebook and the dates put into it, and will not connect them to a prediction of death. I certainly did not connect many of the crazy outlandish things in the story until the class discussion. The class discussion helped me to open my eyes on what was going on, but still did not make me at all relate to Teddy. The ending is so abrupt, it obligates us to either discuss or reread the story to try to find out what went on.
ReplyDelete