DIALOGUE AND CHARACTER INTERACTION AS A TOOL FOR THEMATIC EXPLORATION IN J.D.SALINGER'S WORKS

Main Article Content

Abdullaeva Mukhlisa

Abstract

This article examines the pivotal role of dialogue and character interaction as a narrative device for thematic development in the literary works of J.D. Salinger. Best known for The Catcher in the Rye and his Glass family stories, Salinger employs intimate, often disjointed conversations to uncover complex psychological and existential themes. Through an analysis of key exchanges—such as Holden Caulfield’s confrontational and reflective dialogues, or the spiritually charged conversations between Seymour Glass and his siblings—the study highlights how Salinger’s characters reveal internal conflicts, societal critiques, and quests for authenticity. By exploring the tension, subtext, and emotional nuance in these interactions, the article argues that Salinger uses dialogue not merely for realism or plot advancement, but as a profound lens into alienation, innocence, and the human desire for connection. Ultimately, this approach underscores Salinger’s mastery in crafting emotionally resonant narratives where what is said—and left unsaid—carries powerful thematic weight.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Article Details

Section

Articles

How to Cite

DIALOGUE AND CHARACTER INTERACTION AS A TOOL FOR THEMATIC EXPLORATION IN J.D.SALINGER’S WORKS. (2025). Journal of Multidisciplinary Sciences and Innovations, 4(4), 565-568. https://doi.org/10.55640/

References

1.Alexander, P. (1965). Salinger: A Biography. Renaissance Books.

2.Costello, D. P. (1959). The Language of The Catcher in the Rye. College English, 21(1), 45–52.

3.Galloway, D. (1980). The Catcher in the Rye: A Study in Psychosocial Development. Harvard University Press.

4.Gwynn, F., & Blotner, J. (1958). Salinger’s Glass Family: The Dialogic Dimension of Spiritual Search. Modern Fiction Studies, 4(3), 156–168.

5.Jayne, M. (2010). Bakhtinian Dialogism and the Voice of Salinger’s Narrators. Journal of Literary Theory, 21(2), 88–101.

Similar Articles

You may also start an advanced similarity search for this article.