An odd reading week

I've been bouncing between Franny and Zooey by J.D. Salinger and Death of a Salesman by Arthur Miller. Now, if you've read either of these, you'll understand how completely and utterly fascinating they are, and how sometimes you may have to read a page two or three times to really comprehend the information packed between the lines. I will likely blog about either of these two in the future, but for now, I'm only 30 or so pages into each and I don't feel quite ready or passionate enough to write a post about it yet. But on the other hand, this is my grade, so I need to say something related to my reading this week.

An hour or so ago, out of boredom I picked up The Curious Case of the Dog in the Night-time. I probably read this three times or so last summer, and out of a burst of nostalgia I began reading it again. I read about fifty pages, and I realized something.

This is an absolutely brilliant book.

Well yes, I already knew that. I knew that the first time I read it. I knew that when I was fifteen pages into the book the first time I read it. But one of the contributing factors to the book's absolute brilliance is that we know something the character doesn't.

Too vague? Let me explain. Christopher has Aspergers sydrome or some other form of autism, which isn't directly mentioned in the book, but if you know what the condition is, it's very clear. (Oh look! Another post about a book with a character who has Aspergers. I'm beginning to see a pattern here.) But yes, it's very clear to me and many others who read the book. Christopher lacks serious social skills, including reading body language, motives, and understanding others emotions. He can hardly even get into a conversation with someone.

But as the book goes on, the emotions and shock rise, intensifying the other characters actions (along with Christophers). But what's amazing is that although the other character's emotions are so strong, Christopher cannot understand that they're even having these emotions, or what they are, or why they're acting the way they're acting. Even in the slightest bit. Christopher is blinded, in that sense. But us, having the vague details Christopher (who is narrating) gives us, can come to conclusions about those around him. Mrs. Shears, Mr. Shears, his mother and father. And the fact of the matter is, with Christopher's condition, he can't draw conclusions or read emotions of those around them. But our ability to do so and empathize with the other characters makes the book completely fascinating and beautiful.

In some ways, I compare this book to The Catcher in the Rye by J.D. Salinger. I know it's strange, but hear me out. If you have ever read this book, you will know of Holden Caulfield, who is a fascinating character and narrator. And what makes him so fascinating it this- he's a bit of a jerk. There often thinks he's above everybody, and that everyone else is "phoney" and he's the only and the only person who isn't "phoney." He's very hostile towards other people too. Chances are, if he really existed, no one would want anything to do with him. (Not that he was paticurally liked by the other characters in the book either.) But the story from his perspective, reading his exact thoughts, what causes his actions, and his past- that's what makes the book brilliant.

(P.S.- I don't think Holden is a terrible person or anything. I think he has some very good qualities, but the way he acts towards other people makes him seem extremely jerk-ish to me. But that's unrelated.)

So what we know that he doesn't is that he is arrogant, annoying, and ignorant. But it's hilarious and intriguing to watch Holden act in such a way. In many other books you find yourself always on the narrators/main characters side. In other books it may be easy to assume that the main character thinks in the same way as you do, about the other characters, their life, or in some cases, themselves.

(On a final note, maybe it was a good thing I didn't attempt to write about Franny and Zooey or Death of a Salesman. I like this post a lot.)

P.S.-I just picked up the book and one of the critics on the back mentioned Catcher in the Rye. I kid you not. Damn, now I feel a great deal less observant. So much for ending the post on a high note.