Customer Reviews

Raise High the Roof Beam, Carpenters and Seymour: An Introduction

5 star:		(39)
4 star:		(24)
3 star:		(15)
2 star:		(4)
1 star:		(3)

 

 

Commonly mislabeled the worst of the Glass family saga, and of J.D. Salinger's work in general, Raise High the Roofbeam Carpenters, and Seymour, an Introduction, deserves much praise. Salinger takes a lot of care and thought in writing these two short stories. Raise High the Roofbeam, Carpenters features Buddy Glass attending his brother, Seymour's wedding. Seymour never physically appears in this story, but Buddy narrates so much about him that he is very much a main character. Seymour, an Introduction is a more difficult read. What at first appears incessant ramblings of a grief stricken sibling, at second glance becomes a well crafted work of genuis. Every word is carefully placed, to describle Seymour, Buddy's relationship with Seymour, and Seymour's impact on everyone he met. While getting through the second story, may be difficult it is a worthwhile challenge. You will learn everything about Seymour, from the way he wrote poetry, to the way he shot his marbles, and from Seymour you will learn an entirely new way to view the world, and everyone in it.

-PRBecki

Both of these stories were beautiful, beautiful beautiful. It baffles me to read all of these reviews written by people who were wild about "Raise high..." and almost indifferent toward "Seymour:" I feel that Seymour was the single most important book out of the Glass series. Yes, it's difficult to get through the first time, because, as Buddy says, the General Reader's most immediate want is to "see the author get the hell on with his story," which Buddy doesn't do because, really, there is no "story." However, if you are the type of person who can sit still long enough to follow through with Buddy's run on sentences and footnotes, et cetera, you will find, tucked in several places throughout the story, "the good, the real," the holy. I've read this book about 5 times, and I can't help walking around dazed for days after I'm through with it, marvelling at the tiny things that have suddenly taken on a sort of surreal beauty. My personal Salinger favorite. -Bridgdawg@aol.com

Just what it is about Salinger I don't know, but I was captivated from the first time I read Franny and Zooey. Maybe it's the down to earthness of the dialogue, the kookiness of the characters. Maybe it's the way he says things worth saying without being too lofty or literary, or maybe it's the way that you feel part of his world, get into the heads of the characters. Whatever it is it's good, and too complicated to define easily, which makes it better. Buy this book and all the books. The Glass family can be your friends too.

Truly, what a wonderful final publication for Salinger. While many might argue the point of Salinger's work being over-hyped, it is just that which makes ALL of Salinger's work really, under-estimated. Criticisms ran aloft when Carpenters/Seymour first came out (read the absolutely cruel New Yorker review) but this collection of short stories truly is wonderful art. Raise High the Roof Beam, Carpenters is a wonderfully constructed story, with each part leading beautifully into the next. However, it reads almost like any other Salinger story (which is not by all means a bad thing). It is with Seymour: An Introduction that J.D. really mesmerizes, totally disregarding most any kind of story-telling guidelines. He rambles on and on, and never really stops, but it is within this incessant rambling that its true wonder lies. Deep with compassion, often funny and full of wisdom, I think I can safely say that it is like nothing you will ever read. Like all Salinger work, its first impact might be that of a disastrous nonlinear tale (the New Yorker review suggested the title be Seymour: A Disaster) and in a way its as if Salinger was a "seer" in that he predicted there'd be those readers who'd wish he would just "get the hell on with the story". However, those readers patient and allowing enough to let the many layers unravel themselves will be justly rewarded.

Both stories are incredible, in different ways. "Raise High..." is a beautiful glimpse into both Buddy and Seymour (the diary entry about his scars was incredible). And "Seymour"...wow. It is so original, funny, but poignant at the same time ("John Keats, please put you scarf on"). I don't dare compare these to any of his other works because I wouldn't discourage anyone form reading other Salinger works. They are all wonderful. He is by far the best writer of our time.

I was recently paging through a new book by Nick Hornby (High Fidelity, About a Boy) where he offhandedly comments on various works of literature he has been reading-- it seemed like a clever idea, and I was bored. Apparently, Mr. Hornby read through the entire work of Salinger in a week. Though he was largely satisfied with Salinger's collection of stories, he complained that these last two entries in the Glass Family Saga (which I am reviewing here) were tedious. Hornby noted that he wasn't very interested in the character of Seymour, and he especially didn't care about how Seymour shot his marbles.

Well, I'm afraid that if you've read any of the Glass family stories and don't care much for Seymour, then you had better avoid this two story collection. Salinger's work (including Catcher) is permeated with the loss of a brother who meant the world to his siblings. Every crease and crevice of his face was meaningful, every sigh and utterance. The way Seymour shot his marbles as a boy DOES have relevance, because his philosophy of not aiming (a variation on the Zen practice of archery) is one of the central themes of the stories.

Thus, if the appearance of aimlessness bothers you (the narrator of these two stories, Buddy, is a strong adherent-- so watch out), then you might want to stick to more conventional fiction. I found the entire five story cycle to be the one of most profound pieces of work I have ever come across, but then again-- Seymour isn't for everyone.

Definitely "Raise High the Roof Beam, Carpenters and Seymour: An Introduction" is not J. D. Salinger's most popular and most read work. People who read this book are die-hard fans of this writer and really like the Glass family and are interested in knowing more about them. Those who want to read only one or two Salinger books should stick to "The Catcher in The Rye" and either "Franny and Zooey" or "Nine Stories".

To begin with "Raise High the Roof Beam, Carpenters and Seymour: An Introduction" is not an easy book. Its rhythm is like a roller coaster, sometimes fast, sometimes slow, sometimes up, sometimes down -- but always difficult and inaccessible to those who are not familiar with the Glass's mythology and history. Even Salinger habitués may find some difficult in reading this work.

"Raise High the Roof Beam, Carpenters" tells the story of Seymour's wedding. But, the main character here and narrator is Buddy Glass, the groom's brother, who is the only member of the family to attend the ceremony. All the narrative deals with the fact that Seymour abandon's his bride in the church and doesn't show up.

Buddy is forced to deal whit the situation. He is forced to be with some guests, who happen to be bride's relative. And most of the time he pretends not to be Seymour's brother. Like most Salinger's work, the most important thing in the narrative is the character's thoughts rather than his actions, words etc.

While considering this event, Buddy recreates most of his family's history. And this is a valuable account to those are interested in learn more about the Glasses. So far, sort of a typical Salinger writing.

The second part "Seymour: An Introduction" is more difficult and problematic to those readers. First thing is that is not an introduction -- at least not our typical introduction. First off, because the reader is already familiar with Seymour, from "Raise High the Roof Beam, Carpenters", or from "A Perfect Day the Bananafish" (from "Nine Stories", which happens to be paradoxical, since the short story tells an event that happens later on in the character's life).

Buddy who describes his older brother -- who he happens to admire-- again narrates the story. The narrative this time round is like a labyrinth rather than a roller coaster. The images are formed without a correlation, the narrator jumps from topic to topic making the understanding of his words rather difficult.

Those who are interested in only one Seymour story should go straight to "A Perfect day for Bananafish". It is short, but you'll learn a lot about the character -- actually almost everything you need to know is there. Those who like Salinger and his Glass family, are welcome to read "Raise High the Roof Beam, Carpenters and Seymour: An Introduction", but be advised that it is different (not bad, just different) from what you've read from him, about them.

One of the most ingenious books I have ever had the pleasure of reading. "Seymour" is the perfect example of a story giving back exactly what you put into it. I believe the greatest testament to this book is that there are 2 things that I not only will never forget, but which I use almost daily. First, I believe one of my all-time favorite characters is the little grinning man in the car. To this day I see him sitting politely and grinning ear to ear. Whenever I need a laugh, I think of him. The second, and most important element is from "Seymour" and his explanation to his brother about shooting marbles. If you get excited at hitting the mark, then somewhere inside, you didn't expect to hit it. When you KNOW you can hit it, you just do it, then go on with your life. Truer words have never been spoken. Thanks for the inspiration JD.

In some obscure interview from the 1970s an amateur, elderly "reporter" finagled her way into a meeting with Salinger and about the only thing she got out of him other than a raised eyebrow and cold shoulder for having snaked her way into his solitude, was the following quote: "I don't care about politicians - they limit our horizons. I try to expand horizons." I don't recall the context but I think this encapsulates the meaning behind the title "Raise High the Roof Beam, Carpenters". This carpe diem is younger sister Boo Boo's wedding day mantra for Seymour, written with soap on a mirror. It is June 4th, 1942 and a hot New York summer day. Seymour Glass, the Glass family Zen guru and idol, is about to be married to his fiancé Muriel, but does not show, ostensibly because "the flight ceiling" for his plane ride from Ft. Benning, GA did not "raise" in time. Significantly, Buddy is the only Glass family member able to attend his older brother's non-wedding. "Raise High the Roof Beams, Carpenters" is Buddy's detailed recounting of that vacant afternoon six years before Seymour's suicide. It essentially reads like a mystery in that the "action" centers around the question: what's going on with Seymour? Having only read "Nine Stories" and "Franny and Zooey" we have only had snapshots and vague reminiscences of Seymour, mostly from Buddy. Even "A Perfect Day for Bananafish" is supposedly from Buddy's hand. Here, we are tantalized with a little more information, but it's never enough (even the long-winded, obsessive "Seymour, an Introduction" will only wet the appetite of the most devoted Salinger and Glass sage fans). "Raise High" has an easy-going post-war dialogue and banter akin to "Catcher" and "Franny & Zooey", making it an enjoyable read at face-value; but as with most of Salinger's stories there's more than meets the eye. In addition to the mysterious "Fat Lady" we now have the mute, delightfully grinning old man with top-hat and cigar; more ghostly presence than reality. The turgid comments of the bride-to-be's guests are classic Salinger, and we sympathize with irritated brother Buddy's tossing back some scotch as he serves Tom Collins' to them at his apartment. He sneaks away for a moment and reads Seymour's 1941-42 diary, discovering Seymour's self-description as a "paranoiac in reverse who suspects people of trying to make him happy". Even though he claims to be happy with his fiancé, he doesn't really believe that he'll make her happy, and thus an understated hesitancy to marry. Nevertheless, they do elope later that same afternoon despite the non-wedding. As for why Seymour never appears (and he never does physically appear in any story except to die in "Bananafish") the irascible and pushy Matron of Honor disdainfully relates Seymour's phone-call to Muriel the previous night explaining how he was "too happy" to be married and that the wedding needed to be postponed until he felt "steadier". In his diary Seymour writes that he felt "too keyed up to be with people", mystically adding that he was feeling as though "he was about to be born".

This brings up the prophetic story of "Teddy" (1953) which symbolically closes "Nine Stories". Here is the tale of Seymour's reincarnation, as I see it. 1942 is not only the year of Seymour's awkward marriage, it is also the year of young savant Teddy McArdle's birth. As Seymour's dies his "spiritual death", Teddy (whose facial descriptions exactly match those of Seymour as described in "an Introduction", among other uncanny resemblances) is born. At ten, in late 1952 his sage-like qualities renown, in much the same way that adolescent Seymour was a popular TV game-show whiz, Teddy predicts his own death. Through a diary (another common Salinger device for revelation) he provides two possible dates: that same day, 10/28/52 or his 16th birthday on 2/14/58. The connections with these dates are as of yet beyond me, but there are far too many coincidences to not believe that Salinger attaches significance to them. For example, the publishing dates of "Bananafish" (Seymour's death) and "Teddy" (a re-incarnated death) are exactly 5 years apart.

"Seymour, an Introduction" is somewhat of an encomium with profound insights into art, writing, and life (i.e. writing not to please but because "all your stars are out" & giving it your all - and be warned, Salinger is certainly not writing to please here!). This self-described, self-absorbed panegyric is an essential key to understanding the Glass cycle, but leaves more questions than answers. Buddy is revealed to be the author of "Bananfish", "Raise High", in addition to "Zooey" and potentially "Teddy" (there are references to "Catcher in the Rye" it would seem too). Anyhow, this would change our perception of the stories, for the implication would be that Buddy - ostensibly not the disinterested 3rd person of Salinger - has been telling us about Seymour. And even the notoriously unpublished "Hapworth 16, 1924" (available on-line, among several other uncollected, unpublished stories), which the verbose NY Times critic K. Michiko in her 1997 review judges a "sour, implausible and completely charmless story", suggests some sort of "purposeful disfigurement" of a precocious Seymour by an embittered Buddy. Michiko and other critics agree that the implication is that Buddy is jaded and re-writing his family history. Therefore, we would be reading Buddy's "scripts" for his actor siblings. There is some support for this in Salinger's use of the Kafka and Kierkegaard quotes related to this theme in Seymour's "Introduction", but there has to be more to it than that. Seymour speaks through Buddy as though he were an amanuensis for his spirit. From what I've read in "Hapworth" (the real "charmless" thing is having to read on-line!), and likewise with "Raise High" and "Seymour", there is definitely much to be reckoned with here. Only serious readers of Salinger will get it, or want to, but will be gratified I think with the level of depth here.

There is a metaphorical reference to an "outrunning of one another", when Seymour chases down a racing Buddy at the end of "Seymour". At the half way point of that story where Buddy/Salinger takes a two and a half month break from writing due to "acute hepatitis", Seymour overtakes and consumes Salinger (or is it Buddy?). This is an epiphanal moment for those who enjoy Salinger's increasingly elliptical writing and are curious about what he's aiming for with the Glass family. These two stories create more questions than answers, adding a whole new dimension to his earlier stories. The real question is whether or not there will be more revelations to come. Will Salinger, I wonder, have the audacity to produce and print Seymour's hundred some-odd haikus which Buddy so tantalizingly describes to us? Or is this all wishful thinking to hope for more from a man who hasn't published a morsel since 1965? The mystery continues, and sadly, maybe no one (including Salinger himself) cares anymore. Well J.D., shall we indeed see, more?

Several reviewers here have gotten to the heart of the matter, but I'm going to state it once again as plainly as possible: "Seymour: An Introduction" is the worst thing Salinger ever published. Not only that, it's the only bad thing he ever published. It's so far below the level of his other writing that it doesn't even seem like it's by the same author.

What's true of all other Salinger works, from Catcher through all the stories, is (1) they're immensely readable, (2) by indirect methods, they capture something that's hard to capture with the written word, and (3) they seem real---they ring true---they don't seem made up. I believe Salinger DID make them up, but like a master craftsman, he doesn't leave any seams showing. (There are a few exceptions: Zooey's dialogue seems forced at times ... "Teddy" gets a little heavy-handed ... but this doesn't ruin anything.)

By contrast, "Seymour" is NOT readable (from the first sentence, it flows like literary diarrhea), it does NOT capture anything elusive (only the feeling that you've spent an interminable afternoon with a boozy, impotent windbag), and it DOES seem made up ... hopelessly, uninspiredly made up. (Well ... except for the 85% or so that just consists of the author blathering about himself.) Salinger can't even write his big finale, when Seymour settles the Devega bicycle fiasco (he tells us he "won't describe [it] in detail"---actually, he doesn't describe it at all); and a hundred lesser illustrations refuse to blend & solidify themselves in a genuine character. Seymour's statements are hackneyed, New Age-y, corny, and tedious.

Compare any of Seymour's dialogue here with the journal entries quoted in "Carpenters." The latter are incomparabley superior. The Seymour revealed in "Carpenters" rings true; he really shows some of the originality and genius of a Great Man. Also, he makes a striking contrast to Buddy. "Carpenters" is Salinger writing like Salinger---5 stars, easily---but "Seymour" stinks up the whole thing.