5 ms·

Betraying Salinger

68 points by john7 17y ago

rmorrison 17y ago
While I understand where J D Salinger is coming from, this reminds me of a couple customers that I've dealt with over the years. They come up with some ridiculous request, and you smile and agree because they're the customer and you want the deal, then the whole thing turns out to be a lot more trouble than it's worth.
hugh3 17y ago
A review of the story in question, for those who are curious: http://www.thesatirist.com/books/HAPWORTH.html http://www.thesatirist.com/books/HAPWORTH.html I also tracked down a copy of the full text, but in the interests of some kind of vague respect for copyright I'll leave you to figure out how to obtain it for yourself.
- michael_dorfman 17y ago
  It's also available on the Complete New Yorker DVDs, and in most public libraries, if you still believe in the world outside of the internet.
  - GFischer 17y ago
    Well, for most of us (say, about 6 billion or so), it's NOT available in the local public libraries (yes, I know you were saying the US public libraries, but the WWW / Internet is so much more useful!).
steve19 17y ago
An interesting tale. Salinger wanted the book published but also wanted nobody to know that it had been published.
- nonrecursive 17y ago
  Reminds me of the line in Catcher in the Rye where Holden says that if he could play the piano as well as... some guy was currently playing piano, he would play it in the closet.
- hugh3 17y ago
  Alternatively, he was bored and felt like dicking with a publisher for a while at great expense to them.
danbmil99 17y ago
guy sounds like a first class self-obsessed jerk. World's full of 'em.
- SwellJoe 17y ago
  Yes, but a self-obsessed jerk who created truly great work. I will forgive nearly every personal flaw in the face of great work. Also, thanks for reminding me. I haven't been doing much truly great work lately...it's time to step it up a notch. I sure aint gonna be winning any politeness contests, so the body of work is what matters.
  - DannoHung 17y ago
    The artist is separate from the art.
  - chbarts 17y ago
    > Yes, but a self-obsessed jerk who created truly great work. That is certainly a popular notion. Funny how other good authors are also prolific authors.
- cynicalkane 17y ago
  Alternately, he was a recluse with a morbid aversion to publicity. Those who knew Salinger said (after his death) that he was a very likable person. Certainly they respected him enough to shield his personal life from Salinger-hunters.
msie 17y ago
Wow. If he had actually finished producing the book it would quickly become a bestseller once someone discovered its existence. I think the old man would have had a chuckle buying the plain-looking book at some small, non-chain bookstore.
barrkel 17y ago
I think this publishing attempt was doomed from the outset. There was no way that the attempt could ever escape notice for long; and any notice made of it would have upset Salinger. At best, Salinger would have felt duped, if contracts etc. had proceeded to the point that publishing could no longer be aborted.
dmm 17y ago
The real problem here is the length of copyright terms, which now stand at pretty much forever. If we had more reasonable laws then anyone who damn well pleased could published it.
- michael_dorfman 17y ago
  ...without paying the author of the work. Are you sure that's what you want? How long do you think the copyright terms should be? In the case discussed here, we're talking about a work from 1965. You think that everything published before then should be up for grabs?
  - dmm 17y ago
    > ...without paying the author of the work. Are you sure that's what you want? That is exactly what I want. > How long do you think the copyright terms should be? Personally I think 20 years is a reasonable number. The original Copyright Act of 1790 established a term of 14 years with the option of one renewal. Remember that this was in the age of manual printing presses and horse-drawn wagons. In this age of on-demand printing and digital distribution 20 years is more than enough. The copyright system isn't a right in the sense of speech or assembly, it's a temporary monopoly granted to an author in order to "..promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts..". Any aspect of copyright law which fails to promote those goals fails to uphold the constitutional foundation and ultimate purpose of the copyright system. Copyright law exists in order to encourage authors to create by allowing them to benefit from their creation, but how does allowing a person to collect royalties on something they made 50 years ago promote creativity?
    - michael_dorfman 17y ago
      It promotes creativity by enlarging the possible payout one can receive for one's labors. Writing a book may take several years, and it's not always the first book that succeeds. Capping the potential upside is definitely going to discourage writing works that will take a large investment of time and research. And let's not even talk about all of the books that only became popular more than twenty years after initial publication. Imagine Tolkien in retirement on a modest pension while his books are suddenly bestsellers...

68 points by john7 17y ago

While I understand where J D Salinger is coming from, this reminds me of a couple customers that I've dealt with over the years. They come up with some ridiculous request, and you smile and agree because they're the customer and you want the deal, then the whole thing turns out to be a lot more trouble than it's worth.

hugh3 17y ago

A review of the story in question, for those who are curious: http://www.thesatirist.com/books/HAPWORTH.html http://www.thesatirist.com/books/HAPWORTH.html I also tracked down a copy of the full text, but in the interests of some kind of vague respect for copyright I'll leave you to figure out how to obtain it for yourself.

michael_dorfman 17y ago
It's also available on the Complete New Yorker DVDs, and in most public libraries, if you still believe in the world outside of the internet.
- GFischer 17y ago
  Well, for most of us (say, about 6 billion or so), it's NOT available in the local public libraries (yes, I know you were saying the US public libraries, but the WWW / Internet is so much more useful!).

steve19 17y ago

An interesting tale. Salinger wanted the book published but also wanted nobody to know that it had been published.

nonrecursive 17y ago
Reminds me of the line in Catcher in the Rye where Holden says that if he could play the piano as well as... some guy was currently playing piano, he would play it in the closet.
hugh3 17y ago
Alternatively, he was bored and felt like dicking with a publisher for a while at great expense to them.

danbmil99 17y ago

guy sounds like a first class self-obsessed jerk. World's full of 'em.

SwellJoe 17y ago
Yes, but a self-obsessed jerk who created truly great work. I will forgive nearly every personal flaw in the face of great work. Also, thanks for reminding me. I haven't been doing much truly great work lately...it's time to step it up a notch. I sure aint gonna be winning any politeness contests, so the body of work is what matters.
- DannoHung 17y ago
  The artist is separate from the art.
- chbarts 17y ago
  > Yes, but a self-obsessed jerk who created truly great work. That is certainly a popular notion. Funny how other good authors are also prolific authors.
cynicalkane 17y ago
Alternately, he was a recluse with a morbid aversion to publicity. Those who knew Salinger said (after his death) that he was a very likable person. Certainly they respected him enough to shield his personal life from Salinger-hunters.

msie 17y ago

Wow. If he had actually finished producing the book it would quickly become a bestseller once someone discovered its existence. I think the old man would have had a chuckle buying the plain-looking book at some small, non-chain bookstore.

barrkel 17y ago

I think this publishing attempt was doomed from the outset. There was no way that the attempt could ever escape notice for long; and any notice made of it would have upset Salinger. At best, Salinger would have felt duped, if contracts etc. had proceeded to the point that publishing could no longer be aborted.

dmm 17y ago

The real problem here is the length of copyright terms, which now stand at pretty much forever. If we had more reasonable laws then anyone who damn well pleased could published it.

michael_dorfman 17y ago
...without paying the author of the work. Are you sure that's what you want? How long do you think the copyright terms should be? In the case discussed here, we're talking about a work from 1965. You think that everything published before then should be up for grabs?
- dmm 17y ago
  > ...without paying the author of the work. Are you sure that's what you want? That is exactly what I want. > How long do you think the copyright terms should be? Personally I think 20 years is a reasonable number. The original Copyright Act of 1790 established a term of 14 years with the option of one renewal. Remember that this was in the age of manual printing presses and horse-drawn wagons. In this age of on-demand printing and digital distribution 20 years is more than enough. The copyright system isn't a right in the sense of speech or assembly, it's a temporary monopoly granted to an author in order to "..promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts..". Any aspect of copyright law which fails to promote those goals fails to uphold the constitutional foundation and ultimate purpose of the copyright system. Copyright law exists in order to encourage authors to create by allowing them to benefit from their creation, but how does allowing a person to collect royalties on something they made 50 years ago promote creativity?
  - michael_dorfman 17y ago
    It promotes creativity by enlarging the possible payout one can receive for one's labors. Writing a book may take several years, and it's not always the first book that succeeds. Capping the potential upside is definitely going to discourage writing works that will take a large investment of time and research. And let's not even talk about all of the books that only became popular more than twenty years after initial publication. Imagine Tolkien in retirement on a modest pension while his books are suddenly bestsellers...