What do you think?
Rate this book
Dream Catcher: A Memoir
In her much-anticipated memoir, Margaret A. Salinger writes about life with her famously reclusive father, J.D. Salinger -- offering a rare look into the man and the myth, what it is like to be his daughter, and the effect of such a charismatic figure on the girls and women closest to him.
With generosity and insight, Ms. Salinger has written a book that is eloquent, spellbinding, and wise, yet at the same time retains the intimacy of a novel. Her story chronicles an almost cultlike environment of extreme isolation and early neglect interwoven with times of laughter, joy, and dazzling beauty.
Ms. Salinger compassionately explores the complex dynamics of family relationships. Her story is one that seeks to come to terms with the dark parts of her life that, quite literally, nearly killed her, and to pass on a life-affirming heritage to her own child.
The story of being a Salinger is unique; the story of being a daughter is universal. This book appeals to anyone, J.D. Salinger fan or no, who has ever had to struggle to sort out who she really is from whom her parents dreamed she might be.
With generosity and insight, Ms. Salinger has written a book that is eloquent, spellbinding, and wise, yet at the same time retains the intimacy of a novel. Her story chronicles an almost cultlike environment of extreme isolation and early neglect interwoven with times of laughter, joy, and dazzling beauty.
Ms. Salinger compassionately explores the complex dynamics of family relationships. Her story is one that seeks to come to terms with the dark parts of her life that, quite literally, nearly killed her, and to pass on a life-affirming heritage to her own child.
The story of being a Salinger is unique; the story of being a daughter is universal. This book appeals to anyone, J.D. Salinger fan or no, who has ever had to struggle to sort out who she really is from whom her parents dreamed she might be.
488 pages, Paperback
First published January 1, 2000
77 people are currently reading
1503 people want to read
About the author
Margaret A. Salinger
2 books12 followersMargaret Salinger is the daughter of J.D. Salinger, author of the book Catcher in the Rye.
In 2000 she published Dream Catcher: A Memoir, a "tell-all" book about her father. She lives in Massachusetts with her son.
In 2000 she published Dream Catcher: A Memoir, a "tell-all" book about her father. She lives in Massachusetts with her son.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 108 reviews
August 29, 2013
It seems many folk complain it's not good enough on many levels. Fact is it's not a biography of J.D. Salinger. It's Margaret Salinger's autobiography, his daughter, and her first novel. Sure she uses some of his character's to illustrate her point of view, and I feel she is entitled as it seems apparent some aspects of her life have been molded into his characters. But it's essentially about how her relationship with her father (& mother)effected her. She does not attempt nor claim it to be a biography of her father. There is a lot left unsaid and rightly I think because she is only writing about her father in relation to herself.
When Christina Crawford wrote "Mommie Dearest" about growing up as the daughter of Joan Crawford, people did not expect her book to be a full biography of Joan, nor did they expect Christina to be a brilliant actress either. I don't quite get why so many people are so down on poor Margaret Salinger. She obviously had a fairly troubled childhood, and the fact that she has managed to transcend that is admirable. She makes no claims to be a gifted writer like her father, (as many seem to want her to be going on various reviews I've read on GR) but considering that, the book has a charm as it chronicles her life and and journey to sanity. I have read many books by more talented people in the arts fields where the writing is quite dismal. Granted there were some sections that could have done with serious editing, as it lagged in the middle and the afterword (which was basically notes from another Salinger relative on their family history) could have been incorporated into the body of the work. But I suspect Margaret wanted to give that relative the credit & so it was tacked onto the end.
I muse also that if her father had been an average man in the street and not the "God" Salinger - she may not have published the work. It opens up a can of worms though doesn't it, with famous people or their children airing dirty laundry in public. Yet.... but we expect it, we clamour to know every tiny detail. What was it like to have so & so as your father, to live that life? We cry. We hound the famous and their kids and when their story doesn't sit well with us we disparage them. Don't we?. Go on admit it. As the public we want all the gory details to chew over while watching their lives fall apart on tv and in the tabloids and then we call them names and spit them out. Like spoilt brats. The same name that we call them.
found today 8/2/2013 1 of 20 books for $10
When Christina Crawford wrote "Mommie Dearest" about growing up as the daughter of Joan Crawford, people did not expect her book to be a full biography of Joan, nor did they expect Christina to be a brilliant actress either. I don't quite get why so many people are so down on poor Margaret Salinger. She obviously had a fairly troubled childhood, and the fact that she has managed to transcend that is admirable. She makes no claims to be a gifted writer like her father, (as many seem to want her to be going on various reviews I've read on GR) but considering that, the book has a charm as it chronicles her life and and journey to sanity. I have read many books by more talented people in the arts fields where the writing is quite dismal. Granted there were some sections that could have done with serious editing, as it lagged in the middle and the afterword (which was basically notes from another Salinger relative on their family history) could have been incorporated into the body of the work. But I suspect Margaret wanted to give that relative the credit & so it was tacked onto the end.
I muse also that if her father had been an average man in the street and not the "God" Salinger - she may not have published the work. It opens up a can of worms though doesn't it, with famous people or their children airing dirty laundry in public. Yet.... but we expect it, we clamour to know every tiny detail. What was it like to have so & so as your father, to live that life? We cry. We hound the famous and their kids and when their story doesn't sit well with us we disparage them. Don't we?. Go on admit it. As the public we want all the gory details to chew over while watching their lives fall apart on tv and in the tabloids and then we call them names and spit them out. Like spoilt brats. The same name that we call them.
found today 8/2/2013 1 of 20 books for $10
June 20, 2007
This book was fascinating in a lot of ways--I didn't realize, for instance, that Salinger was kind of easily sucked into "cult-like" practices. Then again, about midway through the book, I started to very very deeply hate the author (his daughter) and all her whining and boohooing and woe-is-me-ing. So much of it was interesting, but Margaret Salinger just really needs to suck it up and not be so self-pitying and melodramatic. I don't doubt that Salinger was probably a bastard sometimes as a dad, but it's really too bad he didn't have a daughter who was a bit more resilient and who could've written a memoir that didn't feel like such a pity-party the whole goddamn time.
August 31, 2011
Much of the research Margaret Salinger has done about Salinger and their family is interesting. She is a fluid writer and captures the remoteness and character of the New Hanpshire wilderness where she grew up, not far from her reclusive father. And one does gain a much clearer portrait of JD Salinger in her piece than in the two biographies I've read of the man. Of course, she has the great advantage over those biographers of having lived with him for a time and known him closely much of her life. So I give this book three stars and not two.
The weaknesses lie in Margaret Salinger's limited understandings of the people and happenings around her. The picture that emerges of her father is clearest when she recounts things he said and did and not often through her reflections about him. The book lacks much shape, and she makes the bad decision to summarize the last 10-20 years of their relationship in a scant couple of scenes.
Salinger remains one of my favorite authors. But it's not difficult for me to separate the author from his work. I suppose that most famous literary figures are reclusive, to some degree, and many, like Salinger, are by turns, mean-spirited, eccentric, paranoid, quick to take offense, hypersensitive.
Margaret Salinger offers very little info about her dad's unpublished writing of the last 45 years of his life. She does write that he was very secretive about it, did work in a studio that no one other than he had access to, and that he never stopped writing so far as she could tell. She also writes that he had many works of fiction in filing cabinets and had tagged them according to whether he wanted them published as is after he died or edited first. That gives hope to those of us who would love to read more by this unique writer.
The weaknesses lie in Margaret Salinger's limited understandings of the people and happenings around her. The picture that emerges of her father is clearest when she recounts things he said and did and not often through her reflections about him. The book lacks much shape, and she makes the bad decision to summarize the last 10-20 years of their relationship in a scant couple of scenes.
Salinger remains one of my favorite authors. But it's not difficult for me to separate the author from his work. I suppose that most famous literary figures are reclusive, to some degree, and many, like Salinger, are by turns, mean-spirited, eccentric, paranoid, quick to take offense, hypersensitive.
Margaret Salinger offers very little info about her dad's unpublished writing of the last 45 years of his life. She does write that he was very secretive about it, did work in a studio that no one other than he had access to, and that he never stopped writing so far as she could tell. She also writes that he had many works of fiction in filing cabinets and had tagged them according to whether he wanted them published as is after he died or edited first. That gives hope to those of us who would love to read more by this unique writer.
June 7, 2014
Throughout this book the author endlessly bemoans just how tough it is being J.D. Salinger's daughter, yet if she weren't his daughter, who would care about her story? Much like Joyce Maynard's whiny Salinger confessional, this book leaves a bad taste in the mouth. The one enticing bit was her father one day showing her "the vault" containing colour-coded manuscripts, with strict directions on what to publish, not publish, and destroy after his death.
October 10, 2020
This was my lunch read.
I began it with the full intention of completing the read.
I do not give up on memoirs easily.
I even had a ton of pages, that I thought were so interesting that I went mad with my highlighter.
Every day at lunch, my book & I went for a walk & I read for a good almost hour.
By page 270, this became a slog.
Yes, her father is Jerome David.
Yes, we have a lot of information about this amazingly reclusive man & his effect on young women.
Yes, his books have influenced generations & we need to know more about the MAN.
I know, I know, we do not really, but yet we still DO.
Yes, he thought no one would ever get that deep & if they did well, he litigated a lot of this, so as to keep what was his, his, but we found out.
Margaret A. Salinger, his daughter, one would think, would give us some insight.
Instead, the book became a bore. She began it with a lot of historical family information, which I found to be quite informative.
But then we got some Joyce Maynard, and then some Mother angst.
And then details about summer camp, and birthday parties and this that & the other.
Why?
I finally had to realize that there is nothing in this book, that would keep my interest.
I have to separate JD from this book.
I think I thought I would learn something, instead I wasted quite a few lunch hours.
Easy Come. Easy Go.
This is a book, you may want in your JD collection, alas, for me ~ it will not be recommended.
Also, full disclosure, I am reviewing a book, that I could NOT finish reading.
I began it with the full intention of completing the read.
I do not give up on memoirs easily.
I even had a ton of pages, that I thought were so interesting that I went mad with my highlighter.
Every day at lunch, my book & I went for a walk & I read for a good almost hour.
By page 270, this became a slog.
Yes, her father is Jerome David.
Yes, we have a lot of information about this amazingly reclusive man & his effect on young women.
Yes, his books have influenced generations & we need to know more about the MAN.
I know, I know, we do not really, but yet we still DO.
Yes, he thought no one would ever get that deep & if they did well, he litigated a lot of this, so as to keep what was his, his, but we found out.
Margaret A. Salinger, his daughter, one would think, would give us some insight.
Instead, the book became a bore. She began it with a lot of historical family information, which I found to be quite informative.
But then we got some Joyce Maynard, and then some Mother angst.
And then details about summer camp, and birthday parties and this that & the other.
Why?
I finally had to realize that there is nothing in this book, that would keep my interest.
I have to separate JD from this book.
I think I thought I would learn something, instead I wasted quite a few lunch hours.
Easy Come. Easy Go.
This is a book, you may want in your JD collection, alas, for me ~ it will not be recommended.
Also, full disclosure, I am reviewing a book, that I could NOT finish reading.
September 21, 2025
A courageous and laborious read. There was certainly a heap to process, especially the last few chapters. This memoir channeled a significantly different tone than Rakoff's My Salinger Year, but multiple perspectives are always crucial to understand the truth. Often times, real truth can tarnish the mysticism of the unknown. Reality can be a tough pill for diminutive dretch to digest.
Edit: I am so glad that I've been celibate for 9+ years and don't have kids. People with daddy issues are probably just as indignant as survivors of car accidents, domestic abuse, armed robbery, strangulation, and suicide.
My favorite part was Margaret's description of Life Savers candy.
Edit: I am so glad that I've been celibate for 9+ years and don't have kids. People with daddy issues are probably just as indignant as survivors of car accidents, domestic abuse, armed robbery, strangulation, and suicide.
My favorite part was Margaret's description of Life Savers candy.
May 1, 2009
Let's see. Total Raintree County for this girl. She is some kind of messed up over the way her daddy didn't raise her.
Not that I blame her, though, even if only some of her story is true. If my father were so revered and yet such a ripe, rotten piece of humanity I too might have tried to regain my delicate balance through the
arts. Just not writing. Maybe pastels.
Not that I blame her, though, even if only some of her story is true. If my father were so revered and yet such a ripe, rotten piece of humanity I too might have tried to regain my delicate balance through the
arts. Just not writing. Maybe pastels.
January 22, 2014
o/m/g, where was her editor?
In the edition I read, this book has 433 pages. When I was half through, I was only up to her 5th grade! When I had about 100 pages to go to finish, I had reached her 15th year. A year, by the way, when she flew to Paris for her Christmas vacation to be with her boyfriend who had already finished high school. She chastises her parents for not communicating with her more or giving her better gifts!
In fairness, there's much discussion in the first couple of chapters about anti-Semitism in America during approximately the first half of the 20th Century and J.D. Salinger's uneasiness with being Jewish. In fact cultural sociology, philosophy, and psychology are woven throughout much of this book and evidently throughout Peggy Salinger's life - at least to-date. More intelligently, though, than the mish-mash of Christian Science and some version of Zen Buddhism and of Hinduism that seemed to be uniquely J.D.'s own or his own and that possessed by his Glass family.
Of course I read "Catcher in the Rye" when I was young, although not that young. I think it was required reading in a first year college course. After that I read the short novels about the Glass family: "Raise High the Rough Beams Carpenter," "Franny & Zooey," "Seymour: An Introduction," come to mind. There may have been others but I gave up on Salinger (the father); I couldn't make sense out of his brand of Buddhism. When he died about two years ago, I thought briefly about him again so when a movie was made about his life, I watched it. It got bad reviews, but I rather liked it and got curious about his life and his work. That's why I decided to read his daughter's memoir. It's not all bad. She's clearly intelligent and a good writer. But what kind of self absorption does it take to keep and/or detail the endless small incidents of pre-school, elementary school, high school and on and on? And she footnotes enough to make you wonder if she wants this to resemble a scholarly work.
She seems to have been a very sickly child and even sickly as an adult to the point of being at death's door more than once and often an occupant of hospital emergency rooms. From what she writes, it's hard to say if her sickliness was congenital, a result of emotional breakdowns, or attributable, at least in part, to her father's scorn of medical science in favor of mind-over-matter, homeopathic cures, and Christian Science beliefs. Strangely enough, though, she seems to have had an endless supply of friends who took her in (as opposed to her heartless, detached father and, perhaps, mother). I say "strangely" because she doesn't present much of a picture of herself that would attract loyal friendship.
In order to shed light on her own upbringing and her father's writing, she deliberately conflates the actions of Holden Caulfield and various members of the Glass family with things her father said to her when he was "raising" her. J.D., in his daughter's telling, comes off as one of the phonies Holden Caulfield so despises. If Holden tried to catch young innocents and save them from danger, Peggy does not see her father as doing the same. Rather he wants to keep everyone (especially young girls - his daughter and his wives or live-in girlfriends) in a state of arrested development; they are not to grow up. They are never to contradict or defy him.
Even if you think Peggy has a too jaundiced view of growing up a Salinger, I think she does illuminate much of J.D. Salinger's writing. Whether she found the catharsis she was seeking in writing her memoir or was able to exorcise her demons, it's hard to say. She does end on an upbeat note. Most of the book is a downer. I think she had to give up trying to be a dream catcher. But she does want to catch her own child - coming through the rye or not.
In the edition I read, this book has 433 pages. When I was half through, I was only up to her 5th grade! When I had about 100 pages to go to finish, I had reached her 15th year. A year, by the way, when she flew to Paris for her Christmas vacation to be with her boyfriend who had already finished high school. She chastises her parents for not communicating with her more or giving her better gifts!
In fairness, there's much discussion in the first couple of chapters about anti-Semitism in America during approximately the first half of the 20th Century and J.D. Salinger's uneasiness with being Jewish. In fact cultural sociology, philosophy, and psychology are woven throughout much of this book and evidently throughout Peggy Salinger's life - at least to-date. More intelligently, though, than the mish-mash of Christian Science and some version of Zen Buddhism and of Hinduism that seemed to be uniquely J.D.'s own or his own and that possessed by his Glass family.
Of course I read "Catcher in the Rye" when I was young, although not that young. I think it was required reading in a first year college course. After that I read the short novels about the Glass family: "Raise High the Rough Beams Carpenter," "Franny & Zooey," "Seymour: An Introduction," come to mind. There may have been others but I gave up on Salinger (the father); I couldn't make sense out of his brand of Buddhism. When he died about two years ago, I thought briefly about him again so when a movie was made about his life, I watched it. It got bad reviews, but I rather liked it and got curious about his life and his work. That's why I decided to read his daughter's memoir. It's not all bad. She's clearly intelligent and a good writer. But what kind of self absorption does it take to keep and/or detail the endless small incidents of pre-school, elementary school, high school and on and on? And she footnotes enough to make you wonder if she wants this to resemble a scholarly work.
She seems to have been a very sickly child and even sickly as an adult to the point of being at death's door more than once and often an occupant of hospital emergency rooms. From what she writes, it's hard to say if her sickliness was congenital, a result of emotional breakdowns, or attributable, at least in part, to her father's scorn of medical science in favor of mind-over-matter, homeopathic cures, and Christian Science beliefs. Strangely enough, though, she seems to have had an endless supply of friends who took her in (as opposed to her heartless, detached father and, perhaps, mother). I say "strangely" because she doesn't present much of a picture of herself that would attract loyal friendship.
In order to shed light on her own upbringing and her father's writing, she deliberately conflates the actions of Holden Caulfield and various members of the Glass family with things her father said to her when he was "raising" her. J.D., in his daughter's telling, comes off as one of the phonies Holden Caulfield so despises. If Holden tried to catch young innocents and save them from danger, Peggy does not see her father as doing the same. Rather he wants to keep everyone (especially young girls - his daughter and his wives or live-in girlfriends) in a state of arrested development; they are not to grow up. They are never to contradict or defy him.
Even if you think Peggy has a too jaundiced view of growing up a Salinger, I think she does illuminate much of J.D. Salinger's writing. Whether she found the catharsis she was seeking in writing her memoir or was able to exorcise her demons, it's hard to say. She does end on an upbeat note. Most of the book is a downer. I think she had to give up trying to be a dream catcher. But she does want to catch her own child - coming through the rye or not.
April 23, 2008
I bought this book to learn more about one of my favorite authors, JDS, and the book starts out like a biography of the man, sure enough. It's even a bit overly scholarly at first (footnotes, analysis of Jewish life in America, etc.) and I thought it was going to turn into a tedious read... But the book changes form several times as Peggy excorcises her demons and finds new reasons to keep writing it. You might have heard some of the debate of the ethics of writing this book while her old man is still alive. But, ultimately this book is about Peggy Salinger and not about JD. She is a troubled, deeply scarred woman who finally makes peace with herself and her father through the writing of this book, and that cathartic process unfolds beautifully as you read.
September 12, 2013
Продравшись через кривой перевод А.Миролюбовой, ничем не улучшенный безграмотным редактором С. Коровиным (считающим, что слово "эллита" пишется именно так, и путающим -тся и -ться) и корректором Л. Яковлевой (полагающей, что "треннинг" - это правильно), имею сообщить вот что.
Фамилия писателя Сэлинджера на обложке - циничный ход русского издателя. Книжка совсем не про него, а представляет собой не очень честное художественное жизнеописание детства и юности клинически истеричной его дочки, несчастного ребенка, который по прошествии лет рассматривает свою жизнь крайне "готишно" (в отличие от своего брата Мэттью, который, как известно, выступил с опровержением после ее публикации), из очень квадратной и консервативной, хоть и дисфункциональной, семьи, ничем не отличающейся от массы других консервативных, но дисфункциональных американских семей прошлого века, и попавшей в самую середку сдвига культурных и общественных парадигм. Ситуация Маргарет отличается разве что наличием более ебанутой (и от этого не менее несчастной), чем у других, мамы - это она, действуя в полном согласии с садистской школой, и повлияла на развитие у девочки клинической истеричности (вплоть до галлюцинаций). А всем, как выводится из текста, приятным и полезным для выживания, девочка все же обязана папе, который в какой-то момент, само собой, больше устраняется из жизни ребенка, но не перестает любить его и заботиться о нем. Родив (поздно) собственного ребенка, Маргарет принимается гонять своих бесов (и эту книжку стоит, на мой взгляд, воспринимать исключительно как частное психотерапевтическое упражнение, отнюдь не как документальный рассказ о папе), а вовсе даже не сводит счеты с папой, как это не раз пытались представить подслеповатые читатели. Сама папа дочку никогда особо не интересовал, она его и в детстве не понимала (само собой), и по прошествии лет даже не пытается (что оправдать несколько труднее).
В части антуража этот вполне художественный текст читается вполне увлекательно, а в части мемуара о папе - с объяснимым раздражением. Ну, потому что для понимания Сэлинджера нужно просто внимательно читать Сэлинджера - он рассказал о себе все, что считал нужным, а снаружи действительно ничего хорошего не увидишь, это даже его дочке, как мы читаем, не удалось. Вполне типично.
Автора очень жаль, но еще жальче ее ребенка, для которого она должна быть весьма инфернальной мамашей. С таким-то анамнезом.
Фамилия писателя Сэлинджера на обложке - циничный ход русского издателя. Книжка совсем не про него, а представляет собой не очень честное художественное жизнеописание детства и юности клинически истеричной его дочки, несчастного ребенка, который по прошествии лет рассматривает свою жизнь крайне "готишно" (в отличие от своего брата Мэттью, который, как известно, выступил с опровержением после ее публикации), из очень квадратной и консервативной, хоть и дисфункциональной, семьи, ничем не отличающейся от массы других консервативных, но дисфункциональных американских семей прошлого века, и попавшей в самую середку сдвига культурных и общественных парадигм. Ситуация Маргарет отличается разве что наличием более ебанутой (и от этого не менее несчастной), чем у других, мамы - это она, действуя в полном согласии с садистской школой, и повлияла на развитие у девочки клинической истеричности (вплоть до галлюцинаций). А всем, как выводится из текста, приятным и полезным для выживания, девочка все же обязана папе, который в какой-то момент, само собой, больше устраняется из жизни ребенка, но не перестает любить его и заботиться о нем. Родив (поздно) собственного ребенка, Маргарет принимается гонять своих бесов (и эту книжку стоит, на мой взгляд, воспринимать исключительно как частное психотерапевтическое упражнение, отнюдь не как документальный рассказ о папе), а вовсе даже не сводит счеты с папой, как это не раз пытались представить подслеповатые читатели. Сама папа дочку никогда особо не интересовал, она его и в детстве не понимала (само собой), и по прошествии лет даже не пытается (что оправдать несколько труднее).
В части антуража этот вполне художественный текст читается вполне увлекательно, а в части мемуара о папе - с объяснимым раздражением. Ну, потому что для понимания Сэлинджера нужно просто внимательно читать Сэлинджера - он рассказал о себе все, что считал нужным, а снаружи действительно ничего хорошего не увидишь, это даже его дочке, как мы читаем, не удалось. Вполне типично.
Автора очень жаль, но еще жальче ее ребенка, для которого она должна быть весьма инфернальной мамашей. С таким-то анамнезом.
December 28, 2016
Прочитати мемуари Маргарет мене спонукало бажання дізнатись більше про "загадкову" для письменницього світу особистість Селінджера. Та й взагалі, не пам'ятаю, коли востаннє читала щось біографічне. Перш за все, варто сказати, що книга дуже чесна. Настільки, що в деякі моменти аж ніяково від напрочуд інтимних подробиць, зазначених в ній. Спочатку читання далось не просто (книга рясніє уривками з творів Джей Ді, що в деякій мірі "пояснюють" та ілюструють моменти з сімейного життя Селінджерів). Тут багато відгуків, згідно з якими цей твір - "ниття ображеної на весь світ дівчинки". Абсолютна неправда, як на мене. Книга намагається нівелювати культ навколо особистості "геніального батька", створений та підтримуваний мільйонами американців. При цьому вона ніяким чином не принижує значення його творів. Як? Розкриває таку собі мерзенненьку душонку вічно скиглячого дідугана-затвірника, стиль життя і вчинки якого були абсолютною протилежністю тих істин, яких він вимагав! дотримуватись від своєї сім'ї.
п.с. хвилинка цікавих фактів. Ви знали, що одна з дружин Селінджера, яку він до того ж постійно принижував, була молодша за нього на 50 років? А те, що його дочка з 15, будучи ще в школі, мусила самотужки заробляти, а пізніше зробити аборт ЛИШЕ через абсолютну відсутність підтримки сім'ї? Я теж ні. Про приблизно такі та інші речі йдеться в цих мемуарах.
п.с. хвилинка цікавих фактів. Ви знали, що одна з дружин Селінджера, яку він до того ж постійно принижував, була молодша за нього на 50 років? А те, що його дочка з 15, будучи ще в школі, мусила самотужки заробляти, а пізніше зробити аборт ЛИШЕ через абсолютну відсутність підтримки сім'ї? Я теж ні. Про приблизно такі та інші речі йдеться в цих мемуарах.
August 5, 2011
I liked it, but....sigh....but. Talk about working through your issues. I wonder about "now." She wrote this before her father died. After this came out, did they ever speak again? Did he cut her (or others) out of his will and leave everything to a chipmunk?
I'm very curious about her education. I remember getting into a top graduate school, with all the extras she had...and when I asked the Dean of the Graduate School about scholarships she laughed at me. So how did Ms. Margaret work it? I feel her name had something to do with it. Sorry, Peggy.
Curious too about this physical breakdown. I wish her peace for the rest of her life now that Mean Mr. Mustard is gone. I hope his wife finds peace. I hope Joyce Maynard and her maryjanes find peace. I know the destruction that such a egocentric personality can wrought. No room for love. Sad.
I'm very curious about her education. I remember getting into a top graduate school, with all the extras she had...and when I asked the Dean of the Graduate School about scholarships she laughed at me. So how did Ms. Margaret work it? I feel her name had something to do with it. Sorry, Peggy.
Curious too about this physical breakdown. I wish her peace for the rest of her life now that Mean Mr. Mustard is gone. I hope his wife finds peace. I hope Joyce Maynard and her maryjanes find peace. I know the destruction that such a egocentric personality can wrought. No room for love. Sad.
October 26, 2007
Sirs and Madams,
Peggy: You are a very talented writer. Please get off your exceptionally whiny horse and please give the man a little credit for that. Also, thanks for the book.
Yours,
Vincent
Peggy: You are a very talented writer. Please get off your exceptionally whiny horse and please give the man a little credit for that. Also, thanks for the book.
Yours,
Vincent
October 23, 2014
“What began to crack was my belief in the illusion of my father.”
Тъжна история. Към края чак грозна. Изпълнена с обвинения. Бях (само)въвлечена в ужасни семейни отношения. Разбира се като много такива, които сме срещали в книгите и в живота. Но когато „обвиняемият“ е любим писател, J.D. Salinger, явно се понася трудно. На последните страници вече бях като ударена с мокър парцал… Дано след публикуването на тази книга дъщерята вече се е поуспокоила (макар че май са последвали дела). Ясно , че лудостите на баща ѝ и майка ѝ са били трудно поносими за едно дете (ако всичко написано е обективно). Но се чудя можеше ли „разплащането“ да не стане публично. Съчувствах на Маргарет (Пеги) за нейното детство (и младост). Но трябваше ли целият свят да знае, че Селинджър може да е голям писател, но не струва като човек според собствената му дъщеря. Всъщност не видях да го признава и за голям писател. На единствено място забелязах да казва „любима част“ (от негово произведение) и се изненадах на фона на цялото плюене. По-често авторката ни обяснява какво е искал да каже Селинджър в творбите си (има много откъси); как е създавал идеални литературни деца и е очаквал собствената му дъщеря да е идеална; как почти всичко според нея е взел от живота - действителни преживявания и личности. Мисля, че доста хора/писатели имат много наблюдения и преживявания, но подобни литературни образци като семейство Глас например не всеки може да създаде. А Пеги говори с ирония (дори ехидност на моменти) за много герои/идеи в произведенията на баща си.
„She was in a serious trouble, and no abracadabra revelation of Seymour’s was forthcoming.” By midwinter of ’57 , when I was about thirteen months old, my mother’s mental trip , tenuous at best, teetered over the edge.“
Всичко останало е с много (често безинтересни за мен) подробности - за отношенията, бита, произхода на семейството; къде е учила, ходила, пила, боледувала, работила, пътувала, обичала.
Сравнявах с биографията на Селинджър от Кенет Славенски - докато той анализира самите произведения (дори не анализира, а прави прочит като всеки „обикновен читател“), Пеги търси предимно връзката с характера на баща си, показва несъответствието между идеалите му в книгите и реалните му действия в живота. Докато Славенски разказва за участието на Селинджър във Втората световна война със съчувствие, Пеги е недоволна, че баща ѝ цял живот е останал войник. И изследва едва ли не като психиатър отраженията на войната върху него.
“For the entire time I lived with my father , I saw no going back, no discernible return from soldier to civilian.”
Всъщност цялата работа е, че Маргарет иска да докаже, че е личност, а не детето, което Джери е имал в мечтите си; че не е идеална, въпреки че той е имал свръхвисоки очаквания към всички. Има моменти, когато авторката не е толкова критична (дори има доста ведри части и снимки с Daddy), но понякога направо е безмилостна. В първите години на Пеги (когато майката е в депресия заради изолацията в горската им къща) Селинджър може би е всичко за малкото момиченце (въпреки че не го вижда често, изолиран в писателската си къщичка). Но по-късно огорчението нараства все повече. Като малка е боготворяла баща си, но последвалите разочарования и ексцентричният му и егоистичен начин на живот влошават отношенията. Чувства се все по-изоставена. Вярно, че Дж. Д. изглежда безкомпромисен.
„I’ll always love you, but when I lose respect for a person, I’m done with them. Finished.”
Това е една изпълнена с подробности „аз-той“ книга; „аз“ в смисъл аз горката, а „той“ – той лошия. Историята на една жена, която не е имала детството и родителите, които би искала да има. И ако на някой друг Дж. Д. Селинджър също му е неприятен като писател или като личност (и особено ако този някой е патриот), съвсем може да го намрази, като разбере какъв е критерият на писателя за мизерия (през 60-те)
“… during the entire time they were married , she never once came with Daddy and me on our “firs-class” trips to New York. She said that when Gerry traveled alone or with us children, he went first-class. When he traveled with her, he (himself) called it “third-class in Bulgaria”. She said it was all part of his attempt to keep her weak female soul pure, away from the seductive, evil goodies that life with a famous author could bring.“
В края на книгата си казах, че е по-добре да се четат произведенията на писателите, не толкова за живота им. Магията леекично изчезва. Но може би само моментно. Примерно след като съм чела за някои нетърпими черти на Хемингуей, това не е повлияно на отношението ми към него като към писател, глупаво би било иначе. Надявам се да се гмурна с удоволствие в дълбините на селинджъровите разкази и новели за пореден път съвсем скоро.
„Whatever he may be, he is not going to be your catcher in real life. Get what you can from his writing, his stories, but the author himself will not appear out of nowhere to catch those kids if they got too close to that crazy cliff.”
Преписвам този откъс и разбирам – нормално е Маргарет Селинджър да е искала Дж. Д. Селинджър да бъде „Спасителят“ за децата си в реалния живот. Но предполагам за читателите произведенията му са точно това, което литературата трябва да бъде, макар че М.С. използва думата fiction с недоволство. Думичката, откраднала татко ѝ.
За да завърша с нещо поне малко положително, един цитат, който показва черта, с която Селинджър е „еднакъв“ и в реалния живот, и в творчеството си.
„… he never lacked respect for local farmers who had something to teach him even though their language might be full of ain’ts and the like. He was merciless, however, on those who tried to make their language sound “tonier” by using, or rather misusing, words that have a sophisticated sound to the unsophisticated ear. “Always use the simplest word possible to say what you’re trying to say” was his adage.”
(Малко е странно български текст с английски цитати, мислех, че би могло книгата да бъде преведена, но вече се съмнявам).
Тъжна история. Към края чак грозна. Изпълнена с обвинения. Бях (само)въвлечена в ужасни семейни отношения. Разбира се като много такива, които сме срещали в книгите и в живота. Но когато „обвиняемият“ е любим писател, J.D. Salinger, явно се понася трудно. На последните страници вече бях като ударена с мокър парцал… Дано след публикуването на тази книга дъщерята вече се е поуспокоила (макар че май са последвали дела). Ясно , че лудостите на баща ѝ и майка ѝ са били трудно поносими за едно дете (ако всичко написано е обективно). Но се чудя можеше ли „разплащането“ да не стане публично. Съчувствах на Маргарет (Пеги) за нейното детство (и младост). Но трябваше ли целият свят да знае, че Селинджър може да е голям писател, но не струва като човек според собствената му дъщеря. Всъщност не видях да го признава и за голям писател. На единствено място забелязах да казва „любима част“ (от негово произведение) и се изненадах на фона на цялото плюене. По-често авторката ни обяснява какво е искал да каже Селинджър в творбите си (има много откъси); как е създавал идеални литературни деца и е очаквал собствената му дъщеря да е идеална; как почти всичко според нея е взел от живота - действителни преживявания и личности. Мисля, че доста хора/писатели имат много наблюдения и преживявания, но подобни литературни образци като семейство Глас например не всеки може да създаде. А Пеги говори с ирония (дори ехидност на моменти) за много герои/идеи в произведенията на баща си.
„She was in a serious trouble, and no abracadabra revelation of Seymour’s was forthcoming.” By midwinter of ’57 , when I was about thirteen months old, my mother’s mental trip , tenuous at best, teetered over the edge.“
Всичко останало е с много (често безинтересни за мен) подробности - за отношенията, бита, произхода на семейството; къде е учила, ходила, пила, боледувала, работила, пътувала, обичала.
Сравнявах с биографията на Селинджър от Кенет Славенски - докато той анализира самите произведения (дори не анализира, а прави прочит като всеки „обикновен читател“), Пеги търси предимно връзката с характера на баща си, показва несъответствието между идеалите му в книгите и реалните му действия в живота. Докато Славенски разказва за участието на Селинджър във Втората световна война със съчувствие, Пеги е недоволна, че баща ѝ цял живот е останал войник. И изследва едва ли не като психиатър отраженията на войната върху него.
“For the entire time I lived with my father , I saw no going back, no discernible return from soldier to civilian.”
Всъщност цялата работа е, че Маргарет иска да докаже, че е личност, а не детето, което Джери е имал в мечтите си; че не е идеална, въпреки че той е имал свръхвисоки очаквания към всички. Има моменти, когато авторката не е толкова критична (дори има доста ведри части и снимки с Daddy), но понякога направо е безмилостна. В първите години на Пеги (когато майката е в депресия заради изолацията в горската им къща) Селинджър може би е всичко за малкото момиченце (въпреки че не го вижда често, изолиран в писателската си къщичка). Но по-късно огорчението нараства все повече. Като малка е боготворяла баща си, но последвалите разочарования и ексцентричният му и егоистичен начин на живот влошават отношенията. Чувства се все по-изоставена. Вярно, че Дж. Д. изглежда безкомпромисен.
„I’ll always love you, but when I lose respect for a person, I’m done with them. Finished.”
Това е една изпълнена с подробности „аз-той“ книга; „аз“ в смисъл аз горката, а „той“ – той лошия. Историята на една жена, която не е имала детството и родителите, които би искала да има. И ако на някой друг Дж. Д. Селинджър също му е неприятен като писател или като личност (и особено ако този някой е патриот), съвсем може да го намрази, като разбере какъв е критерият на писателя за мизерия (през 60-те)
“… during the entire time they were married , she never once came with Daddy and me on our “firs-class” trips to New York. She said that when Gerry traveled alone or with us children, he went first-class. When he traveled with her, he (himself) called it “third-class in Bulgaria”. She said it was all part of his attempt to keep her weak female soul pure, away from the seductive, evil goodies that life with a famous author could bring.“
В края на книгата си казах, че е по-добре да се четат произведенията на писателите, не толкова за живота им. Магията леекично изчезва. Но може би само моментно. Примерно след като съм чела за някои нетърпими черти на Хемингуей, това не е повлияно на отношението ми към него като към писател, глупаво би било иначе. Надявам се да се гмурна с удоволствие в дълбините на селинджъровите разкази и новели за пореден път съвсем скоро.
„Whatever he may be, he is not going to be your catcher in real life. Get what you can from his writing, his stories, but the author himself will not appear out of nowhere to catch those kids if they got too close to that crazy cliff.”
Преписвам този откъс и разбирам – нормално е Маргарет Селинджър да е искала Дж. Д. Селинджър да бъде „Спасителят“ за децата си в реалния живот. Но предполагам за читателите произведенията му са точно това, което литературата трябва да бъде, макар че М.С. използва думата fiction с недоволство. Думичката, откраднала татко ѝ.
За да завърша с нещо поне малко положително, един цитат, който показва черта, с която Селинджър е „еднакъв“ и в реалния живот, и в творчеството си.
„… he never lacked respect for local farmers who had something to teach him even though their language might be full of ain’ts and the like. He was merciless, however, on those who tried to make their language sound “tonier” by using, or rather misusing, words that have a sophisticated sound to the unsophisticated ear. “Always use the simplest word possible to say what you’re trying to say” was his adage.”
(Малко е странно български текст с английски цитати, мислех, че би могло книгата да бъде преведена, но вече се съмнявам).
May 5, 2022
If you want a glimpse of Salinger as a quirky and very flawed human being, rather than a mythic literary wizard who continues to beguile new young readers—mostly through Catcher in the Rye— daughter Margaret almost enthusiastically rips the curtain away.
Doing so fails to diminish his literature, but this lengthy memoir doesn’t read as an attempt to destroy the man or his books, neither those in the past or those to come. Rather, it appears that Ms. Salinger was attempting to come to terms with a father she idolized as a child made into a sidekick on rural adventures until he dropped her from the pedestal he’d put her on and mutual disappointment set in, ultimately leading to estrangement.
She’s a good analyst and a rather good writer herself though not a fan of her father’s literature—which could be the impression she wants to give. This, after all, is a daughter’s, not a literary critic’s book. Its story is both moving and revealing as we follow Margaret Salinger’s own discovery of that traumatized being so many young followers thought was actually Holden Caulfield in place of the legend that a prep schoolboy having a nervous breakdown made him.
Among a rich panoply of biographical details Margaret Salinger gradually unveils, at a pace to mirror their being shown to her, Salinger’s suit on behalf of his character Holden is a fascinating tidbit and Margaret Salinger’s research into the writer’s war career lends weight to the idea that a long and tortuous stint overseas marked him for the rest of his life, much as it contributed to a literary subtext easily missed in examining Catcher as a cultural artifact about teenage angst.
Yes, daughter “Peggy” takes up “the other books,” those spinning the family Glass saga, here too offering some biographical information that gives us a context for their eccentric cast. Although she does not wax laudatory about any of her father’s works, she whets our appetite to review past stories and to await what could be the literary event of several centuries when her brotherMatthew, executor of Salinger’s literary estate, finishes preparing the manuscripts deliberately and carefully left behind to end (by the time they are published) over sixty years of silence.
As much as “Dream Catcher” is a portrait of a man and his famous books, it is the story of a multi-faceted and talented daughter who, privileged as she was, had the guts and curiosity to enter diverse worlds including that of indigenous peoples and the working class she found as a truck mechanic before she studied at Oxford and became a volunteer chaplain.
I was kept interested throughout. Strangely, I came away with more, not less admiration for Salinger as a literary force, and as a complicated person, but also with respect for this stubborn, insightful, and intrepid daughter who refused to play the part of one of his characters or to be cowed by his charisma and single-minded dedication to “the work.” Like many of us, she went to some pains to individuate herself from both parents, while coming to appreciate their psychological hardships, their multiple failings on multiple fronts, but as well, their accomplishments.
I highly recommend Dream Catcher as a source for understanding Salinger and his writing, but just as strongly, for its recounting of a daughter’s journey into her own power as she struggles with a damaged, but unbowed father who happens to already be a literary legend.
Doing so fails to diminish his literature, but this lengthy memoir doesn’t read as an attempt to destroy the man or his books, neither those in the past or those to come. Rather, it appears that Ms. Salinger was attempting to come to terms with a father she idolized as a child made into a sidekick on rural adventures until he dropped her from the pedestal he’d put her on and mutual disappointment set in, ultimately leading to estrangement.
She’s a good analyst and a rather good writer herself though not a fan of her father’s literature—which could be the impression she wants to give. This, after all, is a daughter’s, not a literary critic’s book. Its story is both moving and revealing as we follow Margaret Salinger’s own discovery of that traumatized being so many young followers thought was actually Holden Caulfield in place of the legend that a prep schoolboy having a nervous breakdown made him.
Among a rich panoply of biographical details Margaret Salinger gradually unveils, at a pace to mirror their being shown to her, Salinger’s suit on behalf of his character Holden is a fascinating tidbit and Margaret Salinger’s research into the writer’s war career lends weight to the idea that a long and tortuous stint overseas marked him for the rest of his life, much as it contributed to a literary subtext easily missed in examining Catcher as a cultural artifact about teenage angst.
Yes, daughter “Peggy” takes up “the other books,” those spinning the family Glass saga, here too offering some biographical information that gives us a context for their eccentric cast. Although she does not wax laudatory about any of her father’s works, she whets our appetite to review past stories and to await what could be the literary event of several centuries when her brotherMatthew, executor of Salinger’s literary estate, finishes preparing the manuscripts deliberately and carefully left behind to end (by the time they are published) over sixty years of silence.
As much as “Dream Catcher” is a portrait of a man and his famous books, it is the story of a multi-faceted and talented daughter who, privileged as she was, had the guts and curiosity to enter diverse worlds including that of indigenous peoples and the working class she found as a truck mechanic before she studied at Oxford and became a volunteer chaplain.
I was kept interested throughout. Strangely, I came away with more, not less admiration for Salinger as a literary force, and as a complicated person, but also with respect for this stubborn, insightful, and intrepid daughter who refused to play the part of one of his characters or to be cowed by his charisma and single-minded dedication to “the work.” Like many of us, she went to some pains to individuate herself from both parents, while coming to appreciate their psychological hardships, their multiple failings on multiple fronts, but as well, their accomplishments.
I highly recommend Dream Catcher as a source for understanding Salinger and his writing, but just as strongly, for its recounting of a daughter’s journey into her own power as she struggles with a damaged, but unbowed father who happens to already be a literary legend.
November 26, 2011
I love this book for Margaret Salinger's courage to share it all (and live through it again!). I was reminded again that not everyone is fit to be a parent. I am not judging her parents but it is remarkable (and inspirational to read) how she lived through it all. I started reading this book keen on all the information I was going to get about her father (especially after having read his letters at the Morgan Library) but ended up admiring Margaret and reminding myself of the importance of embracing one's family background and past, regardless of how hard and fabulous it was. I decided I would build my family tree.
July 17, 2025
Picked this book up at an antique store because
1- I loved Catcher in the Rye
2- I knew that JD Salinger became reclusive after his success as an author.
3- I knew he had to have been mortified that his daughter wrote a memoir.
I really enjoyed the book up until the author went to boarding school after that I could almost sense that she wrote the book as a money grab because she knew there were people like me that would be interested in her story because of the three reasons above.
She’s a good writer, had lots of good bits and I can tell she is very well read especially of her father’s work.
Tara Westover, author of Educated does a better job in my option of writing a memoir that doesn’t villainize her parents and gave other peoples perspectives and interpretations of situations that she remembers differently which allows the reader to draw their own conclusions. Margaret Salinger starts out villainizing her mother, idolizing her father, then reverses as a middle aged woman to idolizing her mother and villainizing her father.
There was several times in the book that I felt she overshared. There’s just some things yes you can talk with your friends about but that should not be printed to the masses. Book it’s self was 3.5 stars but by the end of the book Margaret just isn’t a likable person to me. Not that we write to be liked but there’s a way of writing to be known without airing all your family’s dirty laundry in a unclassy way.
So I still love Catcher in the Rye, understand even more why Salinger became a recluse and see why he was mortified that his daughter wrote it. I would be too.
1- I loved Catcher in the Rye
2- I knew that JD Salinger became reclusive after his success as an author.
3- I knew he had to have been mortified that his daughter wrote a memoir.
I really enjoyed the book up until the author went to boarding school after that I could almost sense that she wrote the book as a money grab because she knew there were people like me that would be interested in her story because of the three reasons above.
She’s a good writer, had lots of good bits and I can tell she is very well read especially of her father’s work.
Tara Westover, author of Educated does a better job in my option of writing a memoir that doesn’t villainize her parents and gave other peoples perspectives and interpretations of situations that she remembers differently which allows the reader to draw their own conclusions. Margaret Salinger starts out villainizing her mother, idolizing her father, then reverses as a middle aged woman to idolizing her mother and villainizing her father.
There was several times in the book that I felt she overshared. There’s just some things yes you can talk with your friends about but that should not be printed to the masses. Book it’s self was 3.5 stars but by the end of the book Margaret just isn’t a likable person to me. Not that we write to be liked but there’s a way of writing to be known without airing all your family’s dirty laundry in a unclassy way.
So I still love Catcher in the Rye, understand even more why Salinger became a recluse and see why he was mortified that his daughter wrote it. I would be too.
September 22, 2020
This had the potential to be a really good memoir but in my opinion it lacked focus and had way too many footnotes. The writing was all over the place with so many tangents. It almost read like a thesis for the first 3rd of the book and seemed the author was getting her info from other biographies on Salinger when what I wanted to read was what she knew about him. There were parts that were really good and interesting but they were buried between so much rambling it was hard to get through. She clearly had a difficult childhood and it is no wonder she suffered so much mentally having to deal with the parents she had. She makes such a great point when she says if you love his work as an author great but don’t look to the real man to be your catcher in the rye. I’m a little bit sorry I read it as it is so disappointing to learn that the private author I admired for writing Catcher in the Rye was such a troubled soul.
February 26, 2015
This is a book that I wish I had never picked up. The thing is this: it was a great book, but it absolutely made me hate J. D. Salinger, formerly one of my favorite authors. This memoir was written by his daughter, Peggy, and in it she writes the shocking truth about how she and her brother were abused when they were growing up, about how their father mistreated their mother and forced her to quit school three months before graduating from Radcliffe College and forced her into a life of seclusion in Cornish, New Hampshire, where after a while, he built ANOTHER home on the property where he could live and work by HIMSELF even after allegedly their mother tried to burn their house down because Jerry wouldn’t buy her new clothes (the fire started in her closet). Needless to say, at the age of 40, the author is working out a lot of her issues through the writing of this memoir and now I know why it was advertised as “unauthorized” because there is no way in hell that Salinger would want the truth of his being such a shmuck out there for public consumption.
“ . . . his search for landsmen led him increasingly to relations in two dimensions: with his fictional Glass family, or with living “pen pals” he met in letters, which lasted until meeting in person when the three-dimensional, flesh-and-blood presence of them would, with the inevitability of watching a classic tragedy unfold, invariably sow the seeds of the relationship’s undoing” (50). This explains Ms. Halloran’s curious relationship with Jerry Salinger via pen pal when she met him in Boston for lunch at Chinatown. What a strange character.
“*A generation later, a girlfriend of my father’s wrote that when he came to pick her up from her student apartment at Yale, to come to live with him and drop out of school, he arrived in his BMW, not his big Chevy Blazer, so that nearly all of her possessions, including her beloved bicycle that she’d had since she was a kid, were left behind. (The girl, Joyce Maynard, was eighteen, he was fifty-four)” (93).
Peggy’s mother had an interesting relationship with sanity herself. I’m not sure if she was crazy BEFORE she met Jerry (she was 17 and he was 31), but she certainly flirted with insanity AFTER the fact. She wrote to her daughter something insightful about going crazy:
“Craziness arises from things being blocked not from self-expression. It comes from not being able to face reality nor express one’s worries. If there is a pressure or pain too deep to bear then a necessity rises, in some people, to short circuit experience so that it doesn’t – as is feared – destroy them. Craziness is really an appropriate reaction to what is too intolerable for a certain nervous system to bear. It occurs in weak egos not in strong ones, so I don’t think you have any need to worry about it” (287).
Definitely something to think about there.
“ . . . his search for landsmen led him increasingly to relations in two dimensions: with his fictional Glass family, or with living “pen pals” he met in letters, which lasted until meeting in person when the three-dimensional, flesh-and-blood presence of them would, with the inevitability of watching a classic tragedy unfold, invariably sow the seeds of the relationship’s undoing” (50). This explains Ms. Halloran’s curious relationship with Jerry Salinger via pen pal when she met him in Boston for lunch at Chinatown. What a strange character.
“*A generation later, a girlfriend of my father’s wrote that when he came to pick her up from her student apartment at Yale, to come to live with him and drop out of school, he arrived in his BMW, not his big Chevy Blazer, so that nearly all of her possessions, including her beloved bicycle that she’d had since she was a kid, were left behind. (The girl, Joyce Maynard, was eighteen, he was fifty-four)” (93).
Peggy’s mother had an interesting relationship with sanity herself. I’m not sure if she was crazy BEFORE she met Jerry (she was 17 and he was 31), but she certainly flirted with insanity AFTER the fact. She wrote to her daughter something insightful about going crazy:
“Craziness arises from things being blocked not from self-expression. It comes from not being able to face reality nor express one’s worries. If there is a pressure or pain too deep to bear then a necessity rises, in some people, to short circuit experience so that it doesn’t – as is feared – destroy them. Craziness is really an appropriate reaction to what is too intolerable for a certain nervous system to bear. It occurs in weak egos not in strong ones, so I don’t think you have any need to worry about it” (287).
Definitely something to think about there.
gave-up
January 13, 2009While I've been enjoying this book, it is really depressing. I need a break from the depressing memoirs! A friend mentioned this book portrayed J.D. Salinger in a pretty harsh light, and I have to agree that, yes, it certainly does. The book is well written, and seems to have a lot of thought and research behind it, but again, it seems like the same old same old. A "woe is me" tale. I'm tired of this. What happened to the memoirs that were exciting, and crafted? What happened to writers creating scenes from images and memory? It seems like the general idea these days is to write memoir in the vein of "this is what ACTUALLY happned. here. read my line by line account of every moment and if you need me too, I can include a list of the exact times these things occurred." Maybe this is how memoir is supposed to be, I'm no longer sure nor can I remember classroom discussion regarding it, but to me it should be the latter. I don't care about truth per se, I care about reading whatever form the writer takes to get to his/her truth of an experience or an event. Anyway, this book is far to depressing to carry on at the moment...maybe I'll pick it up around August when I'm sitting in the sunshine.
August 27, 2008
Well, one thing is for sure; JD's method of upbringing did not make the kid a great writer. But who cares? Why should poor JD be in more trouble for that than every other parent whose kid isn't Hemingway?
Serves me right for reading this rather blatantly exploitative book, I guess (part of a project on writers and block, and that's my excuse done). I didn't entirely hate it or the author, but does she exaggerate! She goes on and on about Daddy's funny little ways, but as the book went on and on, I began to feel Daddy might have had a point - when she says, for instance, that they hardly ever had people round, I actually thought they seemed to have a wider circle of friends than my own parents. Most people wiht jobs And young kids who live in the country are going to have a few secure friends rather than a cocktail-party sized group. As for the cults, he was only being stubbornly independent-minded in investigating for himself, but she's got a whole psychology book going here. I hope she's over it all now.
Serves me right for reading this rather blatantly exploitative book, I guess (part of a project on writers and block, and that's my excuse done). I didn't entirely hate it or the author, but does she exaggerate! She goes on and on about Daddy's funny little ways, but as the book went on and on, I began to feel Daddy might have had a point - when she says, for instance, that they hardly ever had people round, I actually thought they seemed to have a wider circle of friends than my own parents. Most people wiht jobs And young kids who live in the country are going to have a few secure friends rather than a cocktail-party sized group. As for the cults, he was only being stubbornly independent-minded in investigating for himself, but she's got a whole psychology book going here. I hope she's over it all now.
January 19, 2021
While this memoir gets a little bogged down at times, when all is said and done there is much to admire about the author's resilience as well as her prose. She shows us a side to her famous father that perhaps no biographer could uncover. She gives ample evidence of his pathological need for control and selfish nature that at times seems downright monstrous. Likewise, his insistence that his (second) wife and children have no relationship with her family.
Later, Peggy shares an anecdote about a trip to the post office at which Mr. Salinger received a letter from his first wife who he had not heard from for nearly thirty years. He tore up the letter and threw it away, explaining "When I'm finished with someone they are dead to me." She summarizes "In his world, to be flawed is to be banished. To have a defect is to be a defector, a traitor. It is little wonder that his life is so devoid of living human beings and that his fictional world has such prominent suicides."
Later, Peggy shares an anecdote about a trip to the post office at which Mr. Salinger received a letter from his first wife who he had not heard from for nearly thirty years. He tore up the letter and threw it away, explaining "When I'm finished with someone they are dead to me." She summarizes "In his world, to be flawed is to be banished. To have a defect is to be a defector, a traitor. It is little wonder that his life is so devoid of living human beings and that his fictional world has such prominent suicides."
June 13, 2010
Okay, another memoir, and what is my comment? The writer was a little self absorbed. Maybe that's a requirement to write one. She actually wrote about how important being popular in school was to her. Gag.
But, the book was more about the relationship Margaret had with her father J.D. Salinger. I did find her memory of living with him in a secluded environment in New Hampshire very interesting. His ideas of how life is to be lived and how much everyone is a "phony". His relationship with her mother also was I would say mentally abusive. Also, many of the comments she attributed to him have explained for me much of what bothered me about "Catcher in the Rye" (not that I like it any better, but I understand it better.)
But, the book was more about the relationship Margaret had with her father J.D. Salinger. I did find her memory of living with him in a secluded environment in New Hampshire very interesting. His ideas of how life is to be lived and how much everyone is a "phony". His relationship with her mother also was I would say mentally abusive. Also, many of the comments she attributed to him have explained for me much of what bothered me about "Catcher in the Rye" (not that I like it any better, but I understand it better.)
November 7, 2014
I picked up this book because I thought it might be an interesting biography about a famous recluse. Turned out to be not so much that, it's mainly an autobiography by his daughter. There's interesting tidbits about her youth and living with a pathologically self-centered father and how she coped. If her father's admittedly novelistic autobiography is to be believed (and I think so), his daughter's real life story mirrors it in many ways, how she coped with eccentric parents and peculiar boarding school counselors. Throes of adolescence. Hallucinations. Bulimia. Suicide attempt. Degrees. Then, at last, stability. Yet father's snarky comments about women, and about her in particular, never ended.
August 31, 2018
A tedious, unstructured, overly-descriptive memoir that has left me too exhausted to even write a longer, properly crafted review. In short, I found the book was overly descriptive, painfully lengthy (450 pages, of which almost half were unnecessary!) and so dry that I had to skim it from time to time just so I could get through to the next chapter. Although there were quite a few parts I enjoyed reading (the author's time at camp, some of her childhood, and getting to know J.D. Salinger) those "good" parts didn't last long - or, they were ruined by the writing itself (WHERE'S THE EDITOR?) I was really hoping that the last few chapters would redeem the book so I looked forward to seeing what the final few pages would offer... Disappointment. They offered disappointment. *yawn*
July 31, 2011
This was kind of an odd book. Written by J.D. Salinger's daughter, the general feeling I got from the book was all over the place. I didn't particularly like the format which was her writing mixed in with quotes and passages from her father's books. It was kind of weird. It was like she was trying to describe her life through his words. The book described her mother and father in depth more and why she turned out a certain way, but then, why do we care about you anyway? It was an odd book. Only for the die-hard Salinger fans. Otherwise, meh. I couldn't relate at all and at the end, I was so glad it was over, I totally didn't care anymore.
March 4, 2012
I loved this book! Secondarily for the J.D. Salinger bits, although the parallels between his characters and his own history were fascinating. Foremost was the unique voice of the author and her observations that kept me hooked. One passage in particular stood out, when she recalls dressing up for a childhood plane trip and writes of missing, in our current times, the formal clothes that used to signify the importance of events. I can't even do the quote justice so I will just type it out here [later when i get time!]
October 28, 2013
I believe that Margaret Salinger wrote this book partially as a "reaching out" to her famous father. I think she wanted him to understand her side of the family dynamics. Her family was extremely disfunctional and she suffered because of it. However, I found some of her memories to be so far out, they seemed to be unbelievable (for instance flashbacks while giving birth.) I also felt she seemed to talk down somewhat to her audience, as though we were not quite sophisticated enough to understand her life. Could just be my interpretation though, read and judge for yourself!
October 21, 2016
The first part of this book was interesting - the author described her early life and that of her parents with references to her father, J.D. Salinger's writings. However, I was a bit puzzled about why she would describe her father's interest in Vedanta, a religion that is thousands of years old, as cult behavior. The penny dropped later in the book when she described being "saved" at a friend's church. Having spent my young adult life in conflict with those of the same ilk who called my spiritual beliefs "the work of the devil," that is where I stopped reading. She lost me at that.
September 12, 2011
H'mm.
Had Salinger not detailed every event in trips, like a badly assembled slide show, and had she tried to limit the number of major characters to a manageable group -- had she concentrated more on her parents and less on the silliness of a junior high school party gone bad -- she might have presented a self-portrait I could have more empathy with. She simply didn't do her job correctly, nor did her editors. Disappointing.
Had Salinger not detailed every event in trips, like a badly assembled slide show, and had she tried to limit the number of major characters to a manageable group -- had she concentrated more on her parents and less on the silliness of a junior high school party gone bad -- she might have presented a self-portrait I could have more empathy with. She simply didn't do her job correctly, nor did her editors. Disappointing.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 108 reviews