What can I say? I have a weakness for the Glass family, and although I found Raise high the roof... much better than Seymour, I liked Seymour maybe because I really wanted to know more about him.
Can't say it's my favorite Salinger, but I enjoyed very much all the same. I must have a weakness for Salinger too.

3,5*

Carpinteiros, levantem alto o pau de fileira – 4,5*

“Então, depois de lhe ter explicado tudo isto, ele diz-lhe que lamenta imenso, mas que não se pode casar até se sentir menos feliz, ou qualquer idiotice do género! Se não se importa, ponha a sua cabeça a trabalhar. Isso parece-lhe de pessoa normal? Acha que é de alguém que esteja no seu perfeito juízo?”

A ironia que Salinger usa nas situações mais delicadas ou tensas é desconcertante nesta novela. Depois de Seymour ter cancelado o casamento à última da hora, o seu irmão Buddy vê-se num automóvel, rodeado pelos convidados da noiva, com todas as conversas descabidas e confrontos constrangedores que daí naturalmente podem surgir.

Seymour: Uma Introdução - 2*

Um tédio, uma enxaqueca, um contraste gritante com a primeira parte tão estimulante. Uma dissertação demasiado “meta” de Buddy Glass sobre o irmão Seymour que, variando entre o tom filosófico, familiar, pretensioso e estapafúrdio, se torna esquizofrénica.

“Mas na maioria dos casos direi que se o genuíno forte de um poeta chinês ou japonês não for o de conhecer um bom diospiro, ou bom caranguejo, ou uma boa picada de mosquito num bom braço, então pouco importa quão longas ou estranhas ou fascinantes as suas entranhas intelectuais ou semânticas possam ser, ou quão enganadoras possam soar quando tangidas, porque ninguém no Misterioso Oriente falará seriamente dele como um poeta, ou o que quer que seja.”

Don't think I could have given this book less than five stars on account of both being completely obsessed with the Glass family and the fact that the writing and characterisation in these stories was absolutely beautiful. Buddy and Seymour are two of my favourites of Salinger's characters and this collection focused on them a lot, although this made it a little more depressing due to Seymour's death and Buddy's obvious mourning. But there's something about the characters here and the sheer force of emotion that is injected in to every one that makes these stories so magical and addictive to me, and half way through Raise High I found myself reaching to read passages from Nine Stories again.
The first story was way easier to read than the second, and I got a lot more from it. Stylistically, An Introduction is more interesting because of the use of stream of consciousness and character study, but the witty dialogue and plot from Raise High made me love that one a lot more. I'd say maybe don't read An Introduction first, but save it until you are acquainted with all of the kids.
I've technically finished reading all of Salinger's published works now, but then again I haven't, and I never will. Because there is always something more of him to read, always something new to gain, and the Glass family will never leave me.

داستان‌های پیوسته با شخصیت‌های بعضاً آشنا رابطه‌ی بهتر و ساده‌تری با خواننده برقرار می‌کنند برای همین اولین داستان این کتاب خیلی ملموس و آشنا ویژگی‌های خوبش را مثل شخصیت‌پردازی و شیوه توصیف شخصیت‌های غایب از طریق دیالوگ‌ شخصیت‌های حاضر به نمایش گذاشت. داستانی درباره خانواده‌ی گلس.

اما داستان دوم؛ پیشگفتار سیمور به طرز عجیبی با شیفتگی نویسنده نسبت به شخصیت سیمور آمیخته و تبدیل به ملغمه‌ای از همه‌چیز به جز خط اصلی داستان شده بود. هرچند از ابتدا هم هیچ خطی وجود نداشت. وقتی درباره سیمور داستانهای خوبی وجود دارد این تعریف و تمجیدها و تملق‌گویی‌ها چه چیزی پیش‌روی خواننده قرار می‌دهند؟ شاید کسالت.

این دومین کتابی بود که از سلینجر خوندم. متن کتابش تقریبن روان بود اما تا اواسط کتاب، کمی حوصله‌ی آدم سر می‌ره، چون اتفاقات و شخصیت‌هایی رو توصیف می‌کنه که جذابیت خاصی ندارن، اما برای جلو بردن سیرِ داستان لازم بودن.
اونجور که فهمیدم، داستان‌های سلینجر با هم ارتباط معنایی دارن و سلینجر یه جورایی نماد می‌ذاشته توی هر داستانش. شخصیتِ اصلی داستان؛ یعنی، بادی مشابه هولدن کالفیلد توی «ناتور دشت» انزواطلب و مردم‌گریز و کمی درونگرا و دارای احساسات پنهان بود. و شاید تا حدی از تنهایی رنج می‌برد. توی داستان، بادی با هیچ کاراکتری صمیمی نبود و سایر اشخاص هم نظر مساعدی بهش نداشتن.
قسمتی که برای من قابل توجه بود، آخرای کتاب بود که بادی شروع به خوندن یادداشت‌های برادرش سیمور می‌کنه. از رومانسی که توی نامه‌هاش بود، خیلی خوشم می‌اومد.
آخر داستان، باز هم سلینجر کاراکتر اصلیِ قصّه رو به حال خودش ول می‌کنه، همه سر و سامون می‌گیرن و «بادی» دوباره با خودش تنها می‌مونه. این خیلی به خودِ سلینجر نزدیکه. خیلی با این نویسنده هم‌‌ذات‌پنداری می‌کنم.

İlk öykü Yükseltin Tavan Kirişini Ustalar tam bir Salinger harikası. Buddy'nin gözlem gücü ve anlatıcı sesinden tutun da Seymour'un günlüğüne ve Glass kardeşlerle ilgili öğrendiklerimize değin her anıyla keyif veren, hayret ettiren, kıskandıran bir öykü bu. Sine'nin de dediği gibi uğruna kurşun yense kimse laf edemez.

İkinci öykü Seymour: Bir Giriş ise ilkinden sonra sığ sulardan derin okyanuslara atılmışsınız gibi hissettiriyor, ve bunu pek de iyi anlamda söylemiyorum. Buddy yaşlandıkça kalemi de ağırlaşmış galiba; Seymour'un şiir derlemesi için bir önsöz olarak yazdığı bu metin yer yer çok iyi olsa da bazı kısımlarda çok uzun, bitmek bilmeyen cümleleri ya da bir anıdan diğerine sıçrayan dağınık anlatımı takip etmekte zorlandım. Önsözden de ziyade bir kardeşin çok sevdiği abisinin ardından kaleme aldığı bir anma yazısı aslında. Hem Seymour'un hem de Buddy'nin gençlikleri, hayata bakış açıları hakkında epey bir şey öğreniyoruz bu öyküde. Okumadığım ya da çok uzun zaman önce okuduğum diğer Salinger eserlerini de okuduktan sonra dönüp tekrar Seymour: Bir Giriş'i okumayı ve Salinger külliyatını böyle bitirmeyi planlıyorum. Bazı kısımları daha iyi anlayabilirmişim, o zaman hakkını verebilirmişim gibi hissediyorum çünkü.

Apparently I’ve now read every J.D. Salinger novel without realising it. I definitely think this is the best conclusion to Salinger’s work and the history of the Glass family.

I enjoyed Raise High the Roof Beam, Carpenters mostly because I like Salinger’s writing and Buddy’s monologue is always going to be interesting to me. However, it was Seymour - an Introduction that really got to me. As someone who is incredibly close with their sibling (after tumultuous and complex periods), I don’t see how it could not.

This story crept up on me, I was reading quite passively for some time and then I found myself engrossed and even shedding tears.

For those that don’t know, this novel follows the Glass family (who have appeared in many other Salinger novels), particularly Buddy and Seymour - the two eldest. buddy, a constant narrator,  attempts to describe his brother who has committed suicide but struggles. Although he digresses and dodges to no avail, he finds himself back trying to describe Seymour in a way that is true .

However, this story is not emotionally manipulative or pandering, Buddy’s writing and actions seem very real. I think, because of my closeness with my sibling, that that’s why it effected me so much.

I would probably suggest you read this novel last if you wish to read Salinger’s canon.

https://rogueliterarysociety.com/f/sa...

I hear myself out on the literary field of battle loudly cheering, and if you look hard enough you can see me flailing my arms as well. I have my own Davega to share. A gift to be given for the meek and serious among you. I am speaking to the seriously patient and long-suffering reader, and not instead to a citizen submissive or spineless in any way. I mean a searcher as I am; one looking for the hard truth and all its surprises.

The credentialed shine, but they shine with the misinformation of the ages, which is hard on a fellow like me. But they shine, and I recognize that, though it leaves a bad taste in my mouth to admit it. Do not worry, you may dismiss me as well, for I have no official credentials either.

A couple days ago I began reading the J.D. Salinger collected masterpiece Raise High the Roofbeam, Carpenters and Seymour: An Introduction again for the second time. The first time I read the book I was quite a bit younger, I had never been to NYC, and back then I was still pretty dumb about most things. Certainly I am wiser now thirty years later, have made my share of mistakes, been to NYC over twenty times, know the city quite well, and know I made an error in my previous assessment of this book. This is a fine piece of writing by Salinger and I enjoyed the book immensely. Both of them.

I think sometimes it is so hard to see. For instance, I now use reading glasses or else the words would be a constant blur. But I get Salinger where I couldn't while I was young. Yes, The Catcher in the Rye was somewhat of a bible and treatise for me way back then. It was easy to attach oneself to a book like that. But the best of them, Raise High the Roofbeam, Carpenters and Seymour: An Introduction are not for the young, though the young are always encouraged to read them all and get what they can out of the experience. And that is where the Seymour quote stating, "They may shine with the misinformation of the ages, but they shine" comes from. It is difficult to accept that Seymour thought them "pieces of Holy Ground", but he did, and that is what made him Seymour.

I am not surprised that so many readers did not like the second piece, Seymour: An Introduction. The most obvious common thread was the comment that Raise High the Roofbeam, Carpenters was more of a story, "a pleasure to read", it had a beginning a middle, and an end. A further negative comment that Seymour: An Introduction was composed as "stream of consciousness" I find particularly quite wrong. Buddy, the narrator, even explains to the reader that his writing here is more of a diary, written over several sittings, each taking thirty cups of coffee or more. The comments call the book "haphazard, disorganized, a bore". For the record I do not find Seymour: An Introduction a "rambling or diffuse read" at all. Anyone not wanting to learn more about writing, or even afraid of measuring up so to speak, to poetry in particular, would be well-advised to stay away from reading it at all. Very early on in my latest reading of this second book I was enamored with Buddy's claim of a lack of original American poets, a claim contemporary writers today still make, such as the quickly-rising fame of the dead guy, Roberto Bolaño. Buddy remarked that a clever professor might describe "...a poem of Seymour's being to the haiku what a double Martini is to the usual Martini." He also hoped it would not be himself who said such a thing, though he admitted profusely he was being garrulous and would also be justly accused of it. Buddy warns the reader at every turn what the reader is in for if he/she continues on to the bottom of the page. Buddy is not the most gracious or humblest of writers. He even thinks his reader might be dumb, and by the looks of the comments, I for one believe he is mostly correct in his assumption. But again, as Seymour said, "They may shine with the misinformation of the ages, but they shine..."

Seymour: An Introduction is simply written as Buddy says, in several sittings of thirty cups of coffee each. Does the coffee, the several sittings as if writing a diary, this "somewhat pustulous disquisition on my brother's poetry" make the Glass family, as a whole, to be regarded as mentally ill? I think not. The reader would be best served to mature and enjoy life's experiences for some years, come back to the novella at a time in life that has little to no demands on the reader but this own incessant impending death-wish slung not so casually over one's shoulder and waiting somewhat patiently for his end. Of course, a little great understanding of what good writing is, what demanding and taxing poetry can do for your damaged head, and the instincts to know that Buddy is not bullshitting you on the page but rather being the further teacher you always wanted to hold close to the vest and unleashed.

The layout of the book is easy to follow especially as Buddy explains everything to the dumb reader. It is possibly his affront on the reader's ability that the negative reviewer finds distasteful. It has often been said that truth hurts. I simply find the book a delightful read. Seymour: An Introduction meant nothing to me the first time through so many years ago. I credit my new understanding of the material to having been a student of Gordon Lish's from 1995 through 1997. Much of the same teachings by Buddy can be found in a ten-hour-straight Lish event. The same principles of "writing for history and not recreation, or because it is fun to do" persists there in Lish's class and also on these pages of Seymour: An Introduction.

One of my favorite segments in the book was Buddy telling about his father Les Glass asking Seymour, as an adult, if he remembered Joe Jackson giving him a ride on the handle bars of his famous shiny nickel-plated trick bicycle? Seymour's answer to his dad was that he wasn't sure he had ever gotten off Joe Jackson's beautiful bicycle. And I guess that is my own Davega I am offering to you.

For the serious complainers who say that Seymour: An Introduction doesn't let us get to Seymour first hand, I suggest reading A Perfect Day for Bananafish collected in Nine Stories. It is a beautiful introduction for getting to know Seymour a little bit first-hand. I always recommend the reading of Bananafish to the people I love before they make their personal plunge into any of the Glass family memoirs.

Otra maravilla de Salinger, y me refiero en concreto a la primera de las historias de este volumen. Me ha parecido uno de los relatos más bonitos que he leído jamás! Y después de esto poco más puedo decir. Está un poco en la línea de "Franny y Zooey", libro que leí no hace mucho y que me dejó maravillado. Es todo tan pequeño y anecdótico y al mismo tiempo tan inmenso!! Es esto posible? Y la presencia de Seymour, que no aparece físicamente en el relato, es tan intensa. Es el prota del cuento y sólo sabremos de él por el resto de personajes y por un par de trocitos "increíbles" de su diario. De verdad, es una maravilla. Ese día caluroso de boda en Nueva York, ese novio que no se presenta, ese pequeño viaje en coche, ese señor bajito e inquietante, ese apartamento de los hermanos Glass, esa jarra de Tom Collins fresquita, ese baño, ese diario... De verdad: una joya! Una preciosidad!

La segunda historia me resulta un poco más inaccesible, me ha costado más leerla y no he llegado del todo a sentirla: se me ha hecho un poco inhóspita, para lectores mucho más avanzados que yo probablemente.

اگر خوانواده ی گلس را نمیشناسید مرا با شما لاابالی ها کاری نیست. اگر خانواده ی گلس را میشناسید و سیمور، فرزند بزرگ خوانواده و سردمدار و مراد و شاخص آن را نمیشناسید، احتمالن از مشکل سندروم داون رنج میبرید و نیازی نیست من با ریویوی خود شما را دچار رنج و عذاب بیشتری کنم. همانگونه که از واو در عنوان کتاب پیداست، کتاب شامل دو داستان ِ "تیرهای سقف را بالا بگذارید نجاران" و “سیمور: پیشگفتار" است. خواننده ی سلینجر پیش تر با کاراکتر سیمور در داستان یک روز خوش برای موز ماهی (یکی از داستان کوتاه های سلینجر) آشنا شده است. اما این بنده ی کمترین قصد دارم در این ریویوی پربار، داستان "تیرهای سقف را…" وقعی ننهم و کشتی کلام را با داستان “سیمور: پیشگفتار" در اقیانوس معرفت بشری به جریان بیندازم. هرچند خواندن دو داستان قبلی را بر ابنای بشر حتی به شرط گذراندن مکابر لازم میدانم.
وقت شریف من بیش از آن ارزش دارد که وارد فحوای کتاب گردم. امروزه روز با آن قرابتی ندارم، لیک از روایت نادر و زیبای کتاب بسیار لذت میبرم. اگر شما نمیبرید تا همینجا هم زیاده ‍پیش آمده اید، پیش تر نروید. کتاب پر است از پاراگراف های بلند و جملات تو در توی تمام نشده. همانگونه که راوی کتاب پیشابیش این هشدار را به خواننده میدهد و دسته گل هایی از پرانتز را چنان که اینجا نقاشی کرده ام => (((()))) به پاس تحمل مصائب خواندن کتاب به او پیشکش میکند. طریقی که راقم این سطور با عنایت به ذهن پریشان خود (که با توجه به دغدغه های انسانی بسیاری که دارد ابداً عجیب نیست) در مصاف با این پرانتز ها پیش گرفته است، تند خواندن کتاب است ( و به جهت دغدغه های زیادی که ذکر شد، هربار این راه حل هوشمندانه در اواسط بازخوانی کتاب به خاطرم می آید). باری، اینطور فراموشم نمیگردد که نویسنده ی پرچانه در مورد چه مسئله ای پرچانگی میکرده است که وسط آن گریزی زد به چیزی دیگر که وسط آن چیز دیگر هم به چیزی دیگر. و البته وسط این دو هم چیزی را فراموش کرده است لابد، اما وسط چیزها مهم هستند که چیزهای بسیاری هست. از چیز بگذریم. فرم منحصر به فرد روایت نویسنده به زیبایی تمام با صداقتی که در آغاز کتاب مدعی میشود عجین میشود. از همین رو کتاب برای افرادی که دغدغه های ارزشی خاص (علی الخصوص آن هم از نوع شرقی) دارند بسیار دل نشین میشود.
کتاب حول محور قهرمان غائبی است (که البته خطاب قهرمان برای کاراکترهای سلینجر جسارتی شگرف میخواهد چرا که هیچ پیامبری قهرمان نیست، پیامبر است) که نویسنده (سلینجر، نه بادی گلس: راوی و نویسنده ی حاضر در کتاب) به ظرافت این مقام عظیم الشان را به او سپرده، تا از آگاهی مخاطب به حس گند خودپرستی آدمیزادی جلوگیری کرده باشد، که میشود گفت تا حدودی موفق هم هست. سیمور گلس، پیامبری است که توصیف های مجیز گونه ی برادر نویسنده ی مریدش (بادی گلس) از او توی ذوق خواننده نمیزند. پیامبری که حتی نقطه ضعف هایی که برادرش از او برمیشمرد هم خود (از چشم خواننده ی عارف مسلکی ارزشی که مطمئناً از خواندن کتاب لذت بسیار بیشتری خواهد برد، که اجازه بدهید به عنوان کسی که دیگر این لذت را نخواهم برد بگویم امیدوارم که کوفتش-تان بشود) عین قوت هستند. و البته به اعتراف ها، خوددرگیری های بی ریا و مکاشفه های نویسنده(بادی گلس) هم کم لطفی میشود، اگر که بگوییم کتاب تنها و تنها به سیمور میپردازد. راوی به وضوح از روایتی که میکند سوا نشدنی است. و پا به پای خواننده از مرز بین این دو، این طرف و آن طرف میپرد(که البته اجازه بدهید بگویم به ظن من چنین مرزی وجود ندارد، و از این آمیختکی گریزی نیست، هرچند به عقیده ی راقم این سطور آنکس که خوانواده ی گلس را بشناسد و سیمور را نشناسد سندرم داون نیست، بل آنکه فکر میکند چنین مرزی وجود دارد به سندرم داون مبتلاست)ه
نویسنده به طرز خوشایندی حراف است. لذت ببرید

Salinger è forse l'unico autore che mi piace leggere a piccoli bocconi durante la giornata, nei momenti più svariati. Qualche pagina a colazione tra un sorso di caffè e l'altro, un paio di morsi per aprire l'appetito in attesa del pranzo (quando sono abbastanza fortunato da non dovermelo preparare da solo), nel divino relax postprandiale, durante l'immancabile lettura da salle de bain (nella speranza che il francese renda l'immagine meno disgustosa) e sgranocchiato in quell'arco di tempo incredibilmente dilatato che segue al classico messaggio "Sto arrivando!" dell'amico ritardatario.
Con questo non voglio dire che si tratti di una lettura poco impegnativa da usare per riempire i buchi di noia, tutt'altro! Seymour. Introduzione, infatti, è proprio la dimostrazione della complessità di Salinger con tutti i suoi caratteristici sproloqui, ma è una lettura che diverte immensamente, nonostante molto spesso ci si chieda cosa stia farneticando il Glass di turno. Ogni singola pagina è un flash che riesce a trasmettermi delle immagini così vivide della famiglia Glass, in tutte le loro peculiari pose e moine, da farmi compagnia per un'intera giornata e vorrei citare a sproposito frasi di Buddy, Seymour o Franny, ma nessuno mi capirebbe.

PS: Caro J.D., ti odio immensamente per non averci fatto dono delle poesie di Seymour. Egoista!

Con rivoltante affetto,

Bruno

ვახ, რა დიდებული ხარ, ჯერომ