Classic Or Dud: Writing A Book Review In The Voice Of Holden Caulfield For The MOst Prestigious Newspaper In The United States Even Though You Are Not, In Fact, A 16 Year Old Boy Who Thinks He Is Rea

Message Bookmarked
Bookmark Removed
True confession: I wrote a book report in the voice of holden caulfield when i was 16 and i thought i was really clever.


Who's Afraid of Holden Caulfield?

*

*

By MICHIKO KAKUTANI
Published: August 23, 2005

If you really want to hear what I think about this guy Dwight Wilmerding, the first thing I should tell you is that he kind of reminds me of me.

In "Indecision," Dwight - or this ghostwriter he got, Benjamin Kunkel - goes into a lot more of all that David Copperfield kind of stuff than I ever would, and he's a helluva lot older than I was when I went through my madman phase, but still, you've gotta admit we're coming from the same sort of place.

We both live in New York City. We're both really close to our sisters. We're both hung up on our prep schools, even though Dwight graduated like a whole 10 years ago. We're both used to getting the ax - me from a bunch of schools, Dwight from his crummy job as a tech support guy at Pfizer.

We both have trouble applying ourselves, or like one of my old teachers said, we've got trouble finding the size of our minds. And we both act a lot younger than we really are. When I was 17, I acted like I was 13, and Dwight, who's 28, acts like he's still 17: he and his slacker friends live in a dormlike apartment, spend a lot of time listening to the Dead, ingest tons of drugs and hold lots of zeitgeisty conversations about Truth and Love and Meaning.

Dwight says "dude" an awful lot, but boy, the guy is a real talker: he's got this voice that just grabs your attention and won't let go, even when you think you're not particularly interested in all the philosophy stuff he's always prattling away about like he's some sort of Walker Percy character or something. That was never my bag, metaphysics and all - I was always more partial to meat-and-potatoes writers like Ring Lardner - but old Dwight, I admit, is pretty great at soliloquizing, maybe not as great as people say I, Holden, was in my heyday, but pretty damn good all the same.

This is a guy who went into therapy with his own sister, who'd apparently read all these psychoanalysis books and wanted to encourage him to examine his inner life. And you get the feeling that he's the sort of guy who, when you first meet him and say, "How's it going?" he's going to give you his emotional temperature down to the last decimal point, and tell you how hard it is being 28 and how he's worried he's somehow mediocre and typical, and how he's got issues with his parents and being a privileged child of the privileged class.

As I've said before, I was never into talking about where I was born and what my lousy childhood was like - certainly not to someone I've just met that very moment - and I usually think of blabbermouths like Dwight as a royal pain in the you-know-what. Still, he's funny, Dwight is, and kind of earnest and definitely a lost soul, which in the end, I admit, really sort of gets to you. I mean, at one point the guy compares himself to a dog or thinks his father thinks of him as a dog - as a big, friendly hound, waiting, head cocked, for an emotional biscuit.

Like the title of this memoir (or what Mr. Kunkel, a founding editor of n + 1 magazine, is calling his first novel) suggests, Dwight makes a very big deal out of his problems making decisions. He doesn't know what he wants to do with his life. He doesn't know if he should commit to the girl he's dating. He doesn't know if he should look for a new job. The poor guy is so paralyzed by the maybes, he doesn't even know what to order in a restaurant. It just kills me that he makes all his decisions by tossing a coin.

So when this girl Natasha he knew back in school - there we are on prep school again! - - e-mails him from Ecuador, sort of but not really inviting him down, Dwight does his coin-toss thing. A couple times. And right before he sets off on his trip, this friend of his, who's got connections at this drug company, offers him this trial drug called Abulinix, which is supposed to cure indecisiveness.

Boy, I wouldn't take some untested pill for all the dough in the world - I really wouldn't. And you'd think that old Dwight might have second thoughts about it too, given that he and his friends took Ecstasy in the early hours of 9/11 - a very ironical act that made him feel way optimistic, before those buildings came crashing down and made him feel like a moron for having felt so happy just a few hours before.

But hey, Dwight and his friends have spent the better part of their lives getting these chemical assists, and I've gotta say that Dwight (or this Mr. Kunkel, who turns out to be pretty great at channeling old Dwight's thoughts) does a swell job of describing what it's like to be high - on weed or Ecstasy or this South American hallucinogen that makes everyone puke their guts out before transporting them to nirvana or whatever you want to call Drug Heaven. This drug Dwight takes in Ecuador gives a new meaning to stream-of-consciousness narration that old James Joyce certainly never, ever envisioned.

Anyway, Dwight is hoping this trip to Ecuador will change his life, and in a way it does. Natasha bails on him, but this friend of hers, a nice-looking chick named Brigid, is happy to become his traveling companion, and of course, as things go in stories of this sort, the two of them get into some serious "romantico-sexual" action while tripping their brains out in the heart of the Ecuadorean jungle.

I'm not sure that I entirely buy the ending of Dwight's trip, which I won't give away here, in case you want to read the book yourself. I actually think Dwight or Mr. Kunkel might have taken a few artistic liberties with it, seeing that it reads more like something my brother might have written for the movies than a real-life experience.

Old Dwight's book really knocked me out, and if there's one thing I hate, it's Hollywood. But then Dwight - who doesn't have as big a thing about phonies as I do - might not mind selling his story to some producer. He might not even mind being played by Jake Gyllenhaal or Josh Hartnett or Topher Grace.

scott seward (scott seward), Wednesday, 24 August 2005 13:56 (twenty years ago)

The Holden Caulfield thing was ruined for me by Neal Pollack's Star Wars as Catcher In the Rye.

Huk-L (Huk-L), Wednesday, 24 August 2005 14:01 (twenty years ago)

he kills me, he really does.

mark grout (mark grout), Wednesday, 24 August 2005 14:02 (twenty years ago)

Didn't Kakutani write something else we all thoroughly trashed on here once?

Ned Raggett (Ned), Wednesday, 24 August 2005 14:02 (twenty years ago)

I Am Michiko Kakutani

jaymc (jaymc), Wednesday, 24 August 2005 14:04 (twenty years ago)

It'd be better if she didn't identify herself as "I, Holden."

jaymc (jaymc), Wednesday, 24 August 2005 14:05 (twenty years ago)

Was she the drummer for Gay Dad?

Huk-L (Huk-L), Wednesday, 24 August 2005 14:06 (twenty years ago)

Of course Salinger wasn't a 16 year old boy either...Probably thought of as clever.

That is not to undermine the point of this thread of course.

Pete (Pete), Wednesday, 24 August 2005 14:09 (twenty years ago)

Are you suggesting that writers need not actually be their protagonists? Even if said protagonist is the narrator? YOU'RE A WITCH!

Huk-L (Huk-L), Wednesday, 24 August 2005 14:12 (twenty years ago)

i hereby declare that all music reviews be written in the voice of the drummer from gay dad.

scott seward (scott seward), Wednesday, 24 August 2005 14:13 (twenty years ago)

*kills self*

Ned Raggett (Ned), Wednesday, 24 August 2005 14:14 (twenty years ago)

Do not disrespect Michiko.

nabisco (nabisco), Wednesday, 24 August 2005 14:47 (twenty years ago)

Even the great Graham Greene, during his first visit to New York, telegraphed back to his editor: SAVE ME FROM MICHIKO KAKUTANI.

nabisco (nabisco), Wednesday, 24 August 2005 14:48 (twenty years ago)

was holden that annoying? i should re-read catcher in the rye

dahlin (dahlin), Wednesday, 24 August 2005 16:00 (twenty years ago)

yes he was. but he wasn't when you were 15.

kyle (akmonday), Wednesday, 24 August 2005 16:29 (twenty years ago)

THIS IS THE BEST THREAD TITLE OF THE YEAR

The Ghost of Black Elegance (Dan Perry), Wednesday, 24 August 2005 18:06 (twenty years ago)

five months pass...
I have the dubious pleasure of teaching Catcher in the Rye to 8th graders, and the definite pleasure of thinking this is the worst book review I've ever read. I don't read many book reviews except in the New Yorker, to be fair; but when this was published, my jaw pretty much hit my boots.

No, Holden Caulfield is nothing like this -- this review is not only a bad idea, but an abject, depressing failure that completely undermine's Michiko Kakutani's credibility as a reviewer -- although she's probably clever enough to defend herself by claiming she intended an inept imitation in order to spotlight Ben Kunkel's ineptitude. The only problem is, this book is pretty funny and a thousand times better written than this review.

Note -- I am friends with the author, which is the only reason I read this review. Doesn't affect how I feel about the review one bit, though, I swear.

Hurlothrumbo (hurlothrumbo), Friday, 3 February 2006 01:20 (twenty years ago)

it was in the times you phony!

j blount (papa la bas), Friday, 3 February 2006 01:25 (twenty years ago)

i'm not sure if i would've loved my 8th grade english teacher for teaching catcher in the rye or hated her for 'ruining' the ONE BOOK THAT REALLY GETS ME MAN. one thing i am pretty sure of though: she would've been thrown in jail.

j blount (papa la bas), Friday, 3 February 2006 01:27 (twenty years ago)

Wait, me? (Yep, I get the phony thing) -- my point is I generally only read reviews in the New Yorker, but I read this one in the Times 'cause it was my friend's book!

Hurlothrumbo (hurlothrumbo), Friday, 3 February 2006 01:28 (twenty years ago)

Ha ha, I also explain all the dirty jokes at the beginning of Romeo and Juliet -- CAN'T STOP ME IN THE PRIVATE SCHOOL!

Hurlothrumbo (hurlothrumbo), Friday, 3 February 2006 01:28 (twenty years ago)

do you think it's supposed to be a bad review?

(I really enjoyed Indecision)

gabbneb (gabbneb), Friday, 3 February 2006 01:31 (twenty years ago)

haha sorry for misreading you (i went to public school)(there was a funny thing where they briefly tried to ban teaching evolution in cobb county, a conservative yuppie county north of atlanta, a while back that got squashed when alot of the parents ranted if they wanted their kids to get into decent colleges they'd have to send them to catholic schools so they could get taught evolution).

j blount (papa la bas), Friday, 3 February 2006 01:33 (twenty years ago)

OK, I am desperately out of the loop. But why is being horribly lame synonymous with being the drummer for Gay Dad? Is Gay Dad the most horribly lame band in like ever? Or like what?

Freud Junior, a man of science and soft focus (Freud Junior), Friday, 3 February 2006 01:36 (twenty years ago)

their drummer's disabled

j blount (papa la bas), Friday, 3 February 2006 01:39 (twenty years ago)

drummer for gay dad wrote bad column and ended it w/ 'so and so is the drummer for gay dad', hence the meme.

LOL!

gear (gear), Friday, 3 February 2006 01:41 (twenty years ago)

Thanks!

Freud Junior, former drummer for Gay Dad (Freud Junior), Friday, 3 February 2006 01:43 (twenty years ago)

I don't think it's supposed to be a negative review, at least not purely -- it's just supposed to be condescending and dismissive, like "Oh, how cute, young novelist does Salinger" -- with an undercurrent/implication of "and it's so easy to do, and to identify it as such" -- but she completely undermines that by failing miserably to write a decent or interesting review in that voice!

Hurlothrumbo (hurlothrumbo), Friday, 3 February 2006 02:12 (twenty years ago)

I'm not qualified to say if it's a good Holden impression, but I don't think that's her intent, at all. The Holden conceit, in addition to being a big implicit compliment (i.e. here's one for a different generation, with a different kind of adolescence), is a cheap costume - Groucho Marx glasses - that signals that she's not of Dwight's generation, and is going to maintain some critical distance, but that she thinks fondly enough of Dwight and his creator (the way adults think fondly of Holden), despite her misgivings about their generation, to celebrate them by reviewing in drag. And it's especially a celebration of what she thinks is Kunkel's real talent - creating a voice. The line about the movie stars may be the penultimate reference to the book's "charm" (a slight, of sorts, as you mention), but she's being sincere, too, saying forget all those post-collegiates with screenplays and supposedly something to say for themselves, pay attention to this guy (and if you have to make movies about post-collegiates, how about looking to a young writer as willing to swashbuckle as to mope). I think the whole thing is written with a great big twinkle in her eye.

Incidentally, I think she's right about the ending as fiction - I don't buy it either. But I'm not sure the book really is fiction at the end. It seems to have morphed (er) into essay/polemic territory, breaking the fourth wall (er again) a bit. Which I found sort of affecting.

gabbneb (gabbneb), Friday, 3 February 2006 02:24 (twenty years ago)

"Adults thinking fondly" is another way of saying "condescending" in my book...it's the reviewer adopting a tone of "ah yes, we've seen these cute foibles before, haven't we?"

But Catcher in the Rye is, even from an adult perspective, a funny book about actual, very real pain --- not a paean to the cute little speed bumps of adolescence. Or at least I think so, and watching it resonate with actual 13-year olds reinforces my opinion. Adolescent pain is just as real as adult pain, and being patronizing toward it is fucking bogus. (I'm not accusing you of that, btw gabbneb, just clarifying why I think this review strikes me as patronizing.)

To treat a funny, fucked up loser like Dwight as "just another generation's Holden Caulfield" is shallow, inaccurate, and missing at least one point of Dwight's character -- he's not a misanthrope; Holden thinks he is, or at least suspects it, but Dwight is a buffoonish self-analyzer in a totally different vein.

Hurlothrumbo (hurlothrumbo), Friday, 3 February 2006 02:32 (twenty years ago)

I'm not sure that it matters what Catcher in the Rye (which I read once, I can't remember when; it didn't do much for me) is actually about. It's regarded totemically as a generational voice. Comparing another generational voice to it is not the same as comparing their subject-matter or condescending to either. And I don't think Kakutani regards Dwight as a misanthrope. The only patronizing going on, beyond that which she typically deems necessary to the critical exercise, is towards either the youthful nature of the author's talent or his character's post-adolescent generation, but not "adolescent pain."

gabbneb (gabbneb), Friday, 3 February 2006 02:44 (twenty years ago)

I guess we're losing track of the one thing that I think matters most about this review -- I think it's a piss-poor attempt at Holden Caulfield's voice. It's a completely unsuccessful literary conceit, whether you think it's a good idea or not (me = NO; you = yes, or maybe).

Hurlothrumbo (hurlothrumbo), Friday, 3 February 2006 02:52 (twenty years ago)

I don't that matters about this review, because I don't think it's really much at all an attempt at Holden Caulfield's voice. If anything, it's much moreso an attempt at Dwight Wilmerding (or Anonymous Gen X-er)'s voice. And it's not necessarily supposed to be a good one, and that's not necessarily supposed to be meaningful.

gabbneb (gabbneb), Friday, 3 February 2006 02:56 (twenty years ago)

Actually, like I said with the Groucho glasses, it's supposed to be Michiko Kakutani's voice having fun playing with snippets of a cartoon version of Dwight Wilmerding's voice.

gabbneb (gabbneb), Friday, 3 February 2006 02:58 (twenty years ago)

well, as I said upthread, this is what I'd predict for a defense of this review: essentially, "it's not SUPPOSED to be well written." Basically, you're suggesting that she is trying to be Scott's 16-year-old self writing the review, it sounds like. I mean, okay, then you succeeded, Ms Kakutani -- sweet! Congrats all around, now let's all go read some books instead of conceptual reviews that are poorly written!

Hurlothrumbo (hurlothrumbo), Friday, 3 February 2006 03:02 (twenty years ago)

I think she succeeded pretty well in doing her job - piquing the reader's interest in a notable new book - but not in doing something that has nothing to do with her job - miming Holden Caulfield.

In the spirit of the introductory post, here is where I admit that in college I wrote a reality-into-fantasy paper in Lawrence Sterne's voice about camping out all night on the sidewalk outside Madison Square Garden to buy Phish tickets, complete with hippie-chick love interest. The paper came back with the note that the Professor's son was also a Phish fan.

gabbneb (gabbneb), Friday, 3 February 2006 03:08 (twenty years ago)

That's a pretty funny story...assuming you didn't really camp out for Phish tickets.

I've never waded into ILE/ILM's periodic debates about the point of art/music/lit criticism, because I'm not really a big consumer of it in most forms -- but is that really what a critic for the New York Times should consider his/her job to be? Piquing interest in the item at hand? That seems so fucking lame and pointless! That gives a huge amount of ammunition to those who argue that criticism is valueless compared to the actual creative product -- ie, it's just advertising with a high-handed concept behind it. I always felt that criticism was supposed to somehow illuminate the work under consideration....although, as I said, I'm not really that into criticism, so maybe here's where I shrug and back away from the whole book review section for good.

Hurlothrumbo (hurlothrumbo), Friday, 3 February 2006 03:26 (twenty years ago)

i blame salinger for my inability to type three sentences without inserting a "sort of."

J.D. (Justyn Dillingham), Friday, 3 February 2006 05:00 (twenty years ago)

freud: Why do people who hate music write about music?

Sym Sym (sym), Friday, 3 February 2006 05:28 (twenty years ago)


You must be logged in to post. Please either login here, or if you are not registered, you may register here.