Teddy’s World Doesn’t Work

Teddy’s World Doesn’t Work
            J.D. Salinger introduces us to the somewhat unbelievable main character of Teddy, a ten-year-old who speaks unlike anyone on earth. Teddy uses large words and speaks eloquently, giving the reader a sense that he is wise beyond his years, but to what age is not clear. Teddy, though supposedly sophisticated, seems be naïve to my pre-programmed American brain. Teddy explains his idea of a new education system. He says, "I think I'd first just assemble all the children together and show them how to meditate. I'd try to show them how to find out who they are, not just what their names are and things like that . . .” Me being the American materialist idealist that I am, makes me think that this statement is preposterous. Any education system based solely on discovery would lead to a breakdown and destruction of society. Using a method as described showing students “an elephant, if I had one handy, but I'd let them just walk up to the elephant not knowing anything more about it than the elephant knew about them” would not help those students. Taking a scientific stand point, this goes against all human evolution. Maybe fine in theory, but it has taken us thousands of years to come up with vital technology like steam engines and telephones. The school system Teddy describes would force students to relearn all knowledge, even words, and make them useless members of society, each with different words for objects and with no ability to do things such as mathematics or anything in humanities, including communicating effectively with other peopel. They may be self-aware, but self-awareness is essentially useless to the progression or at least survival of humans. Now let’s just say I can get over my materialistic self. Teddy is described to be enlightened and follows somewhat of a Buddhist past while remaining in the realm of Christianity. I feel as if most clergy men would poke holes in his testimonials since the path of Buddha and following Jesus and God do vary in some ways. Most importantly the end goal, and the rebirth of the unenlightened. I would think that most “God-fearing Christians” would shun the views of Teddy and call him a heathen. So, I am continually pushed away from Salinger’s young and awkward genius.
            Next topic. Teddy is essentially a sociopath and is extremely difficult to relate to as a reader. Since he feels no emotions and seems to live in a separate plane of reality as the rest of us, it is difficult to see a reflection of ourselves in Teddy. We see him as quirky, and odd, but his notebook is somewhat endearing, it shows the reader that he is attempting to be “normal” for the sake of his parents and everyone around him. Teddy however does not love anybody, he has an “affinity” for them. Likewise, Teddy does not believe that his parents love him, rather they love what they think he should be, or what they are trying to shape him to be. This displaced character’s description of his parents makes the readers heart throb, but we are wrenched back by how much he obviously does not care. We are also given a jolt of sympathy when he cannot read Nicholson’s obvious sarcasm “Nicholson smiled. "Not personally," he said dryly. Teddy hesitated. "Don't be angry with me," he said.” Teddy does not pick up on the tone of Nicholson’s voice and takes what most people say for face value. This is reflected in Teddy’s own speech patterns Teddy is a very blunt character who seems to generally speak his mind, except when making a conscious effort to please his parents and some other people on deck, but unlike Sheldon Cooper from the Big Bang Theory, his bluntness holds no comedic effect. He may have even predicted his own death when he just says "For example, I have a swimming lesson in about five minutes. I could go downstairs to the pool, and there might not be any water in it. This might be the day they change the water or something. What might happen, though, I might walk up to the edge of it, just to have a look at the bottom, for instance, and my sister might come up and sort of push me in. I could fracture my skull and die instantaneously." His odd abilities further distance us from Teddy and leaves us in a mysteriously limbo at the end of the story when the last thing we are told is that a woman screams.
            Teddy is a hard character to get in touch with and his logic is hard for me to follow. I like to think of myself as somewhat of a decent Catholic, but what he was saying was too much for me. I like, enjoy, and love logic! I am going to college to be an engineer for a reason. I also like to have a specific and measurable goal. Teddy’s path to enlightenment seems difficult to measure and is also a mutt of Christianity and Buddhism. I doubt that I will ever let go of my tie to logic and seek enlightenment. This fact along with the fact of Teddy being an emotionally non-relatable character made it rather difficult to enjoy this story. The lack of enjoyment of some of the points made by Salinger allowed me to pick apart the things I didn’t like, maybe rather unfairly. I hope others are feeling the same way I was, and I am not a loner on this little negative island.


                        

Comments

  1. Dale RobbennoltMarch 11, 2018 at 12:30 PM

    I agree with many of the things you said but disagree with others. I think that Teddy as a character is very consistent in his ideas of how society should function. He bases a lot of his ideas off of things that he has been taught but chooses to alter them somewhat to come up with his own worldview. I think that his idea for school fits within this framework. He thinks that everyone should be able to come up with their own ideas about the world and their own way of looking at things without relying on the possibly fallacious ideas of others. While I definitely agree with you that his system would not work, it does fit within his framework. Not knowing more about the extent of Teddy's religious beliefs it is hard to judge them fully. I have very different beliefs from him, and his seem to be pretty unique, but that didn't bother me as much as it seemed to bother you. I do agree with you that his lack of emotion bothered me. He seems completely separate from those around him and is completely oblivious to the social cues that Nicholson gives in his conversation. Overall, I think that I couldn't relate to Teddy, but that didn't really turn me off from the story.

    ReplyDelete
  2. yichenMarch 11, 2018 at 8:55 PM

    I agree with Dale. I didn't really care that Teddy was unreliable because I think that was the point of the story. We are the "unenlightened" and he is on his path to enlightenment, which makes him think differently from us. The part where he doesn't love his parents was a little weird for me, but overall his character is consistent throughout the story, and it was intersting to see someone else's view.

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

The War After War

We began the semester reading short stories whose theme was deeply entrenched in the feelings and effects of war. This past week has contrastingly been filled with narrations of mainly women who are conversing with men who have returned from war and/ or women who are talking about their husbands have returned from war. Instead of a perspective of a soldier feeling detached from society, or telling stories of their near-death experiences, predominately in Vietnam, Salinger has given us narratives which both indirectly and directly tell his audience what people are thinking of returning soldiers. In the second story, the reader is also given insight into the experience of what it is like to lose a loved one to war. In “A Perfect Day for Bananafish,” the reader understands that Seymour has done something or has the potential to do something that is unfavorable, according to Muriel’s mother. In the second story, “Uncle Wiggily in Connecticut,” Eloise’s husband, presumably somewhat altered...
Read more

Mr. Pirzada Comes to Dine

The narrator of “Mr. Pirzada Comes to Dine” is a little girl between probably 2 nd and 3 rd grade. The year is given, and the reader is constantly reminded of the time period by the repeated theme of the Pakistani Civil War in 1971. The narrator, Lilia, describes the year of 1971, focused around the constant visits of Mr. Pirzada, a visiting researcher whose family still lives in Dacca, the city most affected by the war. The most critical part of the story is Lila’s perspective. Lila at the beginning of the story looks at the war from an American perspective. Why, because this little girl is American. Everything around her is telling her to be American. The only thing she learns in Social Studies is the history of the USA, specifically before it became deeply involved in global politics. Lila’s mother is very excited about how American she is, but there are small tid-bits in the story, off-hand comments like “I’ve never seen an Indian witch before,” which show the reader that the whit...
Read more

Johnnie’s Struggle to Find His Niche

Johnnie’s Struggle to Find His Niche             Johnnie struggles throughout “The Outing” to find himself, both in his church and in his family. Johnnie struggles to find his place in his family due to his oppressive preacher father. Johnnie struggles to be accepted by his step-father, because he is a product of his mother’s premarital sins. Johnnie’s step-father does not treat his son with respect, only ever praising and fawning over his half-brother, Roy. The tension between Johnnie and his step-father is palpable, especially when Johnnie attempts to challenge his father, he wants his father to see how much he “hated him” and is met with the response of “We get home, I’ll pull down those long pants and we’ll see who’s the man” (pg. 36).             Johnnie is understandably angry with his step-father. Before the standoff, Johnnie’s father, named Gabriel, had claimed that...
Read more