I listened to a Podcast recently (of 'This American Life' if my memory serves me well) where a director was complaining about having to do DVD commentaries and explain the entire movie, all the camera angles, etc.. His argument was that a little bit a of work by the viewer or a little bit of ambiguity was good for art. That way you can get different interpretation and someone else might discern a different lesson.
Today, news has it the JD Salinger has filed a suit to prevent publication of an up-coming book on Holden Caufield 60 years later. I don't really believe in restricting speech, but I do get his sense that someone's interpretation of his work of art can sully the original. And I don't believe that you should really profit on someone else's idea without bringing anything new to the table. I haven't read the book in question, and never plan to. I do really like the line attributed to Salinger though:
"There's no more to Holden Caulfield. Read the book again. It's all there," the court filing quotes Salinger as saying in 1980. "Holden Caulfield is only a frozen moment in time."
I think he's right. Maybe I will read it again.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
1 comment:
I hope Salinger wins. His refusal to allow for any sequels or reinterpretations just shows how true to his work that he is. Too bad that the publicity will make it harder for them to eliminiate the European copies
Post a Comment