“Catcher in the Rye” Sequel Banned but Readily Available in US

Adding to the absurdity of the recent court decision to ban “60 Years Later: Coming Through The Rye” from being sold in the US is the fact that the book has already been published in the UK and, thus, it is readily available to anyone willing to shop online.

TechDirt has pretty good dismantling of Judge Betts’ dangerous and ill-conceived ruling.

For those looking to pick up their own copy of this “banned” book try here, here or here

Judge Indefinitely Bans “Coming Through The Rye”

If there is one thing I learned during almost ten years developing feature film scripts, is that there is no such thing as a completely original idea.

Every script I read (well into the thousands) could be seen as being derivative of a pre-existing work.  In fact, if one eliminated every script from Hollywood that was derivative of a pre-existing work there wouldn’t be any screenplays left.

The same can be said for the world of novels.

Unfortunately, one Judge Betts disagrees and has indefinitely banned the wholly original novel “60 Years Later: Coming Through the Rye” which imagines what  Holden Caufield would be like at the age of 76.  While clearly building from the foundations of “A Catcher in the Rye” there is nothing in the new work that is a direct quote or paraphrase from the original.

Judge Betts has rejected the defenses’ argument that the new novel…

…did not violate copyright laws because it amounted to a critical parody that had the effect of transforming the original work.

This is one of the major elements of the “fair use” defense and one that did not strike me as even a bit far-fetched.  Instead, Judge Betts claimed:

“Both narratives are told from the first-person point of view of a sarcastic, often uncouth protagonist who relies heavily on slang, euphemisms and colloquialisms, makes constant digression and asides, refers to readers in the second person, constantly assures the reader that he is being honest and that he is giving them the truth.”    LINK

If that’s enough to ban a this book, I’m sure there is an endless stream of young adult fiction that should certainly be given the same treatment.

Seeing judges ban books is never a good thing.  Seeing a judge ban a book for such flimsy reasons as this is downright frightening.  If her ruling stands, expect to see a long line of similar suits in the near future.

J.D. Salinger Misuses Copyright Law to Quash Creativity

J.D. Salinger is really only known for a couple of things.  He is a total recluse and he wrote “A Catcher in the Rye.”  Oh, and he’s is famously litigious when it comes to anyone doing anything with the material contained in that book.

So, along comes a guy with a fun literary idea: let’s take this iconic teenager and look at what his life might be like at the age of 76.  Neat, right? Unless you happen to be J.D. Salinger and then you go crying to the courts that this completely original reimagining is somehow infringing on his 58-year-old novel.

Although the new book, “60 Years Later: Coming Through the Rye,” by J.D. California, a pseudonym for a Swedish writer (and the book’s publisher), Fredrik Colting, was published in the UK, a US court is blocking its release for at least ten days while a judge, seemingly sympathetic to J.D. Salinger’s case, considers her final decision.

Let’s consider why this is so ridiculous:

1) While Colting’s book is clearly, and unabashedly, drawing from the original novel, his story is completely new.

2) Colting’s protagonist is a 76-year-old man. Holdin Cauffield was a teenager.

3) The publication of Colting’s book will only bring fresh interest, and fresh sales, to Salinger’s work, at a time when it feels like he is slowly falling out of favor – fewer teens I know today have read “A Catcher in the Rye,” than when it seemed to be required reading in my youth.

4) Salinger comes off looking like a mean, reactionary kook.  He might actually be just that, but nobody wants others to think so.

It always saddens me to see one artist trying to shut down the creativity of another artist.  I’m sure J.D. Salinger isn’t thrilled by the idea of someone taking one of his literary children out for some fresh air, but liking something is not pre-requirement for its legal existence.

Also, let’s be honest, Colting’s book is out there and anyone who wants to read it will read it, no matter what happens in this single US court.

Related articles by Zemanta

• Salinger sues over Rye ’sequel’ (news.bbc.co.uk)