J. D. Salinger: Seeing the Glass Family (Franny and Zooey)

Franny Glass, by David Richardson

Fifty years ago this September, in 1961, J.D. Salinger published a slim volume containing a short story and a short novel that had both appeared previously in The New Yorker. The book was Franny and Zooey. It appeared ten years after the publication of his best-seller The Catcher in the Rye.

Franny and Zooey is the first book-length treatment of the Glass family. Salinger had already introduced some of the family members in stories such as “A Perfect Day for Bananafish” and “Down at the Dinghy”. Now, the mythic Glass clan is fleshed out. The family history is revealed for the reader, and all the family members enumerated – the parents: Les and Bessie; and the seven children: Seymour, Buddy, Boo Boo, the twins Walt and Waker, Zooey and Franny.

Franny Glass is presented almost entirely in dialogue. The youngest of the Glass family, she’s a student at an unnamed Eastern college. She is attending a football weekend at her boyfriend Lane Coutell’s school. It is the Yale game, so his school is of the Ivy League variety.

During lunch with Lane at a restaurant, Franny expresses her disenchantment with phony college intellectuals and the egotism that abounds in her school’s Theatre department, which caused her to quit her involvement. She also reveals that she has been reading a book called The Way of a Pilgrim. It’s a work by a simple Russian pilgrim that describes his spiritual quest, and how he learned to say the Jesus Prayer: “Lord Jesus Christ, have mercy on me”.

The Jesus prayer is to be repeated continuously until it becomes as much a part of the unconscious functioning of the body as the beating of the heart. After a period of time, the constant repetition of this prayer will lead to a form of spiritual illumination, similar to the meditation on “om” in Buddhism or Hinduism.

Franny suddenly becomes quite ill – it appears that she is in the throes of a complete nervous or spiritual breakdown. She is pale and perspiring, and at one point she goes into the bathroom and cries for about five minutes. Upon returning from the bathroom, she is okay for a while, but then faints. Lane Coutell takes her into the restaurant manager’s office, and then goes to fetch a cab. She is seen at the end of the story in the office, lying on the couch, silently repeating the Jesus prayer.

Zooey Glass, Franny’s brother and the second youngest of the seven Glass children, picks up the story on the Monday after the disastrous Saturday of the Yale game. Franny has returned to her family’s apartment in New York. The second story in Franny and Zooey opens with Zooey sitting in a bathtub and reading a letter from his older brother, Buddy (who is, curiously, also the story’s narrator).

Bessie, the matriarch of the Glass family, then enters the bathroom, uninvited by Zooey, and a conversation ensues which is conducted through the drawn shower curtain. Bessie smokes a cigarette and worries about Franny’s fainting spell. Zooey sits in the bathtub, fields his mother’s questions, and peppers her with sarcastic comments.



Zooey then gets dressed and goes into the living room, where Franny is laying on the couch under a blue afghan, accompanied by the family cat, Bloomberg. In a lengthy dialog, Franny complains again of the egotism inherent in the world of the theatre. Zooey then launches into a tirade in which he questions her motives for saying the Jesus prayer.

Zooey’s criticism of Franny ends up with her in tears. Zooey retreats to the sanctuary of the old bedroom of his brothers Seymour and Buddy. Seymour has been dead for six years. He committed suicide while on vacation with his wife in Florida. Buddy is now a writer living in seclusion in upstate New York.

On the door of the bedroom is a large poster board covered with hand printed quotations from world literature and religion, from the Bhagavad Gita to Kafka. The quotes were all penned by Seymour and Buddy when they were precocious young children. Buddy and Seymour had also undertaken to educate both Franny and Zooey in the ways of Eastern religion when Franny and Zooey were young, and although Zooey expresses some resentment at this, he still reveres his brother Seymour, who has the status of a saint in the Glass family.

After a time spent reflecting on the quotations in Seymour and Buddy’s room, Zooey calls Franny on the private telephone that Seymour and Buddy had installed in the bedroom years before. He pretends that he is Buddy, and for a while Franny falls for the ruse, before she realizes that she’s talking to Zooey.

Zooey relates a story about the Fat Lady. All of the Glass children appeared at one time or another on a radio quiz show called “It’s a Wise Child”. One day when Zooey didn’t want to shine his shoes before going on the show, Seymour told him to do it for the Fat Lady. Seymour never told him who the Fat Lady was, but in Zooey’s imagination she sat on her porch all day and listened to the radio. She had very thick legs, and cancer.

Franny reveals that Seymour had also told her to be funny for the Fat Lady. Her imagined Fat Lady also had cancer. Buddy then tells her that all of her audience when she is acting is Seymour’s Fat Lady. All the phony intellectuals and pompous professors who she has been complaining about are the Fat Lady. And that the Fat Lady is Christ.

At the end of this conversation, Franny experiences joy. It is as if she began in spiritual ignorance in the first story, and through the Jesus prayer and the revelation of the Fat Lady, she has achieved a sort of enlightenment. The story ends with Franny falling into a deep, dreamless sleep in her parent’s room.

Salinger’s technique as a writer up to this point was to provide as little narrated detail as possible. His stories are told through dialogue, through letters, through telephone calls. It is left to the reader to flesh out the appearance of the characters, and catch the important details in their conversations. Franny follows this technique.

In the story titled Zooey, however, Salinger begins to change his style. First, the narrator, Buddy, is garrulous and much given to digressions and parenthetical expressions, even in his short introduction. This contrasts to the story titled Franny, in which spare narration gives way to dialog, and the story advances on the conversation of the two characters.

Salinger also gives us a wonderfully detailed description of the Glass family apartment:

There was a Steinway grand piano (invariably kept open), three radios (a 1927 Freshman, a 1932 Stromberg-Carlson, and a 1941 R.C.A), a twenty-one-inch-screen television set, four table-model phonographs (including a 1920 Victrola, with its speaker still mounted intact, topside), cigarette and magazine tables galore, a regulation-size ping-pong table (mercifully collapsed and stored behind the piano), four comfortable chairs, eight uncomfortable chairs, a twelve gallon tropical fish tank (filled to capacity in every sense of the word, and illuminated by two forty-watt bulbs), a love seat, the couch Franny was occupying, two empty bird cages, a cherrywood writing table, and an assortment of floor lamps, table lamps, and “bridge” lamps that sprang up all over the congested landscape like sumac”.


All this before any mention of the overstuffed bookshelves and the books spilling out of them.

Thus Salinger, in the Glass family chronicles, has moved on from his earlier, spare style. To create his iconic family, he utilizes a more robust prose. Descriptive passages abound. The conversations of his characters are now filled with references to Buddhism, to the Bible, to Greek philosophy. The critical response to this shift in style, at the time, was not overwhelmingly positive. John Updike, in a review appearing in the New York Times wrote: “This seems to me the nub of the trouble: Salinger loves the Glasses more than God loves them. He loves them too exclusively. Their invention has become a hermitage for him. He loves them to the detriment of artistic moderation.”

But, don’t we as readers feel the same as Salinger? I too love the Glasses. Artistic moderation will not suffice to bring this eccentric family of geniuses to full light. We need Buddy’s ramblings, we need Zooey’s cigars and sarcastic remarks, we need the chain smoking Bessie to really get into this family’s collective head. We need to stand in awe of the poster board collection of quotes from world philosophy that the 12 and 10 year old Seymour and Buddy carefully printed, in India ink, with no smudges or erasures.

This was a family, led by the oldest brother, Seymour, that thirsted for knowledge. Adult knowledge. Seymour and Buddy were reading classics of literature before the age of 8. They had full command of the Eastern (as well as the Western, but the preference was for the Eastern) canon. They instructed their younger siblings in this knowledge. They were the smartest kids by far on the “it’s a Wise Child” radio show.

Here are kids – kids that are like miniature adults – that unselfconsciously read every book they can get their hands on. They discuss religion, philosophy and poetry at the dinner table, never with any thought of being too “brilliant”, or of toning down their conversation for people outside of the family. They are unabashed intellectuals.

When I first read the book Franny and Zooey, I thought – wow! Here are young adults who have read vast amounts of literature. Zooey can quote a text verbatim after a single reading. Both siblings are proud of their level of knowledge, and ready to do verbal battle over the ideas in the books they have read. What a refreshing change from the anti-intellectual culture that I grew up in, where constantly reading books was considered odd, and thinking about the world around you was considered suspect. And if you studied Eastern religion, you were officially a wacko, and small children would follow you around and call you names.

Reading this book was liberating for me. I could now carry Doestoevsky, Kafka, and Rimbaud around at school, and no longer hide them under a math book. I now talked openly with my friends about books and ideas, and not what was on the next test, or who was likely to be Homecoming Queen.

When you are between the ages of 8 to 18, your thirst for knowledge and your love of books is at its most intense point. The Glass family were heroes for me at this age. I wanted to be a guru like Seymour, and a writer like Buddy. These of course were not the career paths being pushed by my high school guidance counselor, but I let her advice to become an economist or political science major sort of wash over my fevered brow without ever cooling my true desires.

On this level, the Glass family can be a role model for anyone who wants to pursue a literary, intellectual or spiritual life. The siblings show how you can sustain yourself in this pursuit without compromising your core beliefs.

On another level, Franny and Zooey is about communication. Franny tries to communicate her dissatisfaction with the Theatre Department at school. Lane Coutell is more concerned with getting to the game on time, so the two do not communicate. But Franny does communicate with us, the reader.

Zooey Glass talks with his mother through a closed shower curtain. They trade barbs. They barely communicate. Bessie Glass is unable to connect with Zooey about her concern for Franny. Zooey can only criticize his mother. The two do not communicate, but again, Bessie communicates to us, the reader.

Zooey goes into the living room where Franny is resting. He pontificates, she starts crying. Again, no communication.

But then Zooey goes into Seymour and Buddy’s old room, and through the device of the private telephone he is able to get through to Franny, even after Franny realizes the ruse – that it is really Zooey on the line. But she doesn’t hang up. And they talk about the Fat Lady, and at the end they communicate and Franny achieves a sort of joy. The telephone represents a special means of communication, much like the voice of God.

Finally, Salinger presents a search for spirituality that is not tied to any one sect or denomination. The Jesus prayer is just as good a way to achieve a state of enlightenment as mediation on a Buddhist mantra. For the Glass siblings, who have seemingly read all the religious texts in the world, each religion is valid, and all religions are similar. The important thing is to embark on a spiritual quest, regardless of which religious group helps you to make the quest. The siblings have found that each quest leads to the same place, and that God is God, whether you call him Christ, Allah, or Buddha.

In the beginning of Zooey, the narrator, Buddy, tries to decide if this is a spiritual story or a love story. He says in the end that it is a love story:

… I know the difference between a mystical story and a love story. I say that my current offering isn’t a mystical story, or a religiously mystifying story, at all. I say it’s a compound, or multiple, love story, pure and complicated.


And it is. Franny discovers that she must love all of her audience – the phony teachers, the Lane Coutells, her ego-driven fellow actors. She must love them all, because they are all the Fat Lady, a singulary unlovable person who she must love nonetheless, as she represents Christ. Love is thus unselective. We love all people, just as Christ did. This is the way to enlightenment that Salinger points us toward in this slim but magnificent volume.


* * * * *


(This is the first of four posts celebrating J. D. Salinger’s fictional Glass family, members of whom appear in several of his best stories and novellas. This is the first Litkicks collaboration by writer Michael Norris and artist David Richardson since their Marcel Proust: Beyond the Madeleines series in 2010. The next entry in this series will appear on Thursday.)

11 Responses

  1. This synopsis or
    This synopsis or interpretation which borders on “explication de texte” is truly a “kick in the pants ” to get us reading or rereading the original. Aside from the need for a couple of minor grammatical adjustments, it has greater depth than any cliff notes or literary criticism some of us read as undergraduates. I can give no higher compliment than to say that the writing is reminiscent of my mentor, critic of French literature, and great teacher, Wallace Fowlie.

    But what is especially exciting to me is the accompanying brilliant illustrations or portraits which make the text come alive. Mr.. Richardson’s sense of line, light, and color is remarkable and shows enormous understanding of the characters. Beyond that, they are simply interesting in themselves because they evoke questions. What is the young woman thinking? Why is she so ashen? Why isn’t the young man looking in the mirror? What does he see approaching out of the corner of his eye? These are more than illustrations; they are stand alone portraits each with its own emotional content.

    I have no doubt that J.D. himself would highly approve of this entire collaboration. Thank you both for bringing such pleasure to an expatriate living in France who also spent a part of his earlier life with the Glass family who taught him that he wasn’t the only kid on the block living with a group of wackos; it almost made me nostalgic for my homeland.

  2. Thank you so much for this!
    Thank you so much for this! The Glass family is my favorite literary family bar none, and Franny & Zooey my favorite of all of Salinger’s writings. (To provide context: I was such a fan in my 20’s that I spent a day at the NYPL making myself a copy, from the microfilm, of “Hapworth 16, 1924”. I’ve given copies of The Way of the Pilgrim as gifts). The portraits of Franny & Zooey are not how I have envisioned them – but I love them all the same. Particularly Franny – who appears more ‘Bolshevik intellectual’ than the Natalie Wood inspired image I had of her. I like that.

    I think the amazing thing about the Glass family, that I’ve always associated with Salinger the man (vs. the author), is their genetic lack of an emotional filter. They all appear so open and raw. With the possible exception of Walt – they feel things too deeply and tend to retreat from the world as protection. Hence Seymour’s suicide, Walker’s entry into the clergy, Buddy’s isolation. We even see flashes/references to that kind of pain in BooBoo’s son in the story “Down by the Dinghy”. In fact, it’s hard to think of a Salinger character who isn’t an open- & emotional- open wound.

    I always saw this story less as about the spiritual as about Zooey attempting to navigate his sister out of that dark emotional territory.

  3. It surprised me when I saw
    It surprised me when I saw the picture of Franny … It comes quite near to the image I had of her.

    I first read the book when I was younger (well, I’m still quite young … I was 15 or 16 then I guess) and I didn’t understand all underlying meanings neither could I give a solid interpretation after reading the book. However, while reading this texts the book seemed to come back to me and in my mind I began reading it again – and now I have to read it again, ha

    … Of course, all the edgy and bizarre characters of the Glass family make them so interesting, but most of all it is the lack of personal information about them that urged me to read as much as possible about them. Somehow they have the same charm as the Lisbon sisters from ‘The Virgin Suicides’ (I guess someone will kill me for this comparison); and this will make us reread the book endlessly.

    I really enjoyed this article! And this made me laugh: “And if you studied Eastern religion, you were officially a wacko, and small children would follow you around and call you names.”

  4. I read Franny and Zooey
    I read Franny and Zooey twice, ’cause I love Salinger, but I have to say… it never did anything for me at all.

  5. Ron, you say you are an expat
    Ron, you say you are an expat living in France. Where are you in France?

    I was an expat for four years, living in Paris in the 20th arrondissement, in the shadow of the Cimitière Père Lachaise.

  6. I “borrowed” this book from
    I “borrowed” this book from my big brother’s room when I was a kid, and read it straight through. The Glasses and their world were so foreign and yet so familiar–I didn’t understand them but wanted to be just like them. Which seems odd, when I read your description of all the miscommunication and isolation going on. I still have that stolen copy of the book, so I guess I need to either return it or reread it.

  7. Michael (and Ron), I have to
    Michael (and Ron), I have to agree with Ron. You do wonderful “explications de texte” that stimulate readers to read these novels for the first time, or to read them again. David Richardson’s illustrations are always very expressive and perfect companions to your explications de texte. They also seem very… Kafkaesque. By which I mean that they’d go well with any of Kafka’s novels or stories.

  8. Cher Michael,
    I know certain

    Cher Michael,

    I know certain areas of Paris very well, Père La Chaise being one of them. How did you ever leave after four years?

    I live in the Aquitaine, “nul part en plein campagne au calme entre Soumensac et Loubès-Bernac”. I’ve been here for 10 years but came to France several times a year for 40 years before moving permanently. I’ve taught French for 50 years as I am still tutoring expats.

    Thank you so very much and congratulations on all the work you’ve done to help enlighten others by so clearly elucidating texts and for your sensitivity by including David Richardson’s art. Your work on Proust is astoundingly brilliant. Do you know Wallace Fowlie’s “A Reading of Proust”?

  9. Ron,
    I had to leave France


    I had to leave France in 2008 after the Great Crisis. I had a fear that I would run out of money and be destitute. As it turned out, I should have stayed in France. C’est la vie. I plan to return to France but somewhere in the country where it is less expensive.

    I am going to read Wallace Fowlie’s “A Reading of Proust.” I have his translation of the works of Rimbaud.

  10. Michael-
    As I neared the end


    As I neared the end of this book, coming home after work on the green line one day last month, its moving ending caught me by surprise, though it was my third time reading the text. Such a strong finish, that book. It begins, for me, when Zooey (as Zooey post-ruse) asks Franny if she knew that he and Buddy were in the audience at some play she was in, and she responds with this stillness–she’s holding the phone in some way that feels significant–staring at it or something, or she’s holding her head in some way that suggests Zooey is finally saying something that reaches her.

    But even before that, when Salinger shifts Zooey to Seymour and Buddy’s bedroom–for that hour or so that he’s in there–getting up all that he needs before calling Franny on the phone in the guise of Buddy, because he can’t begin the conversation as Zooey. I think it’s brilliant the way Salinger does this. And then he, Salinger, doesn’t allow the ruse to go on. He gives the phone back to Zooey so he can talk to Franny as himself. It’s a great book. Thanks. Very nice piece.

  11. I remember going to a small
    I remember going to a small Methodist church in Louisiana, because I had to out of respect for my overly Baptist southern family, and I just slipped a copy of Franny and Zooey into the free Bible they let you read and read it in the back the whole time during the service. How ironic to read about the religious themes about acceptance while hearing a confusing sermon. A very good interesting companion piece to read after reading Catcher in the Rye.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *