The LAST and BEST Holden blog (maybe)

Is Holden a static or dynamic character?

Yes.

But I know Scalia would never let me get away with a one-worded answer. So, before I perform a little character analysis of Holden Caulfield, I’ll define the question (and provide where I got the definition).

Static Character - a character that does not undergo inner changes or undergoes a little change. (From https://literarydevices.net/static-character/ )

Dynamic Character - a character that undergoes changes throughout the narrative due to conflicts he encounters on his journey. (From https://literarydevices.net/dynamic-character/ )

---

Starting way, way back, at the beginning of the book, Holden Caulfield introduces himself curtly and states he simply doesn’t, “feel like going into [where he was born, what his childhood was like, how his parents were occupied before they had him, and all that David Copperfield kind of crap], to tell you the truth.” He doesn’t feel like it so he starts with the day he leaves Pencey Prep. He starts his tale on a Saturday and all 234 pages of (my version) of the book takes place over a span of about two days. Saturday to Monday.

Now, in a way, this introduction to the book creates a static feel that is held throughout the rest of the book. He says he doesn’t want to go into it and he doesn’t; he holds firm to his two day story. He never fully retells another day with as much detail as he does that Saturday, Sunday, and Monday.

However, in another way, this introduction creates a dynamic temptation, where the reader gets the feel that maybe they can prove the narrator wrong. He says he doesn’t want to go into it but my mind as a reader starting going to the idea of forcing him to go into detail in facts of his past without fully retelling a story. And Holden does. We learn more about Allie and his intelligence, his compassionate heart, and Holden’s huge admiration of him through his story about punching the windows in his garage after finding no inspiration for writing Stradlater’s composition for English. We learn more about Holden’s mother and her awful smoking habits and her weak emotional status when Holden goes home to wake Phoebe up late one night. We learn more about every person Holden claims he refuses to go into detail on, which shows a change in his telling of the story, agreeing with the idea that he is a dynamic character.

But despite Holden’s outlay of information he, as a narrator, isn’t certain that he’s doing it. J.D. Salinger, as an author, definitely knows he’s doing it -- the genius -- however, Holden Caulfield does not seem to understand that he is giving out the information he previously stated he didn’t feel like going into. Which restarts the loop that is continually traced in my mind, turns my brain to mush, and utterly leaves me confused when it comes to the idea that Holden is a static character. Or the idea that he is a dynamic one.

Throughout this book, Holden essentially remains the same. The first page of the book claims he only feels like telling one story and the last page of the book touches upon that ideal again, bringing up the fact that he doesn’t want to say anymore. And, throughout Holden’s thought processes, many things remain the same. His initial opinion on any one topic usually stays the same after he analyzes it. Like on page 214, Holden is sleeping in a train station, but tells the reader not to ever try it because, “It’ll depress you,” yet he continues through the next paragraph to try to keep sleeping, claiming he was, “more depressed than ever,” in his life. Which adds to the argument that Holden is definitely static.

However, with new information and new pieces of literature, Holden is changing -- in the reader’s eyes at least. With every suicidal reference and every time Holden talks about how depressed he was, we are granted more of a look at his mental instability. So Holden Caulfield changes in the reader’s point of view. The reader goes from seeing a jerk teenager who can’t seem to keep his thoughts in order to a struggling boy who is moments away from hitting rock bottom. But can that be considered dynamic? Holden is undergoing change but the majority of that change is in our perspective.

Holden also seems to constantly think about Jane. He brings her up in his thoughts in almost every chapter yet he always seems to have the same thoughts and the same plan of action. He remains static through his decision to stay motionless when it comes to reentering her life.

On the other hand though, he changes his thoughts from where they used to be JaneJaneJane to where they became PhoebePhoebePhoebe. Even in the second to last chapter, he talks about feeling happy, content, and like he wanted to go home and stay where he was because of how happy Phoebe was on the carrousel. His thoughts in each chapter took a dynamic path because he changed what he used to be thinking about Jane and filled his mind with his kid sister.

Continuing on, Jane is a pretty confusing subject and Holden’s thoughts on her definitely throw me for a loop. From the first time he mentioned her, after learning that Stradlater had a date with her, to the last time he mentioned her, his perception of her didn’t change. She still was the Jane that kept her kings in the back row, the Jane who was always friendly to Holden, the Jane who he kissed everywhere but her mouth. He was static in the sense that he didn’t ever have a new experience that would change her in his eyes.

But what about that time when he actually dialed her phone number? Granted, he got her mother on the line and hung up because he wasn’t in the mood to talk to Jane’s mother, but what can that change -- from not dialing, not dialing, not dialing (despite the billion phone booths he walks into) to actually dialing -- be called if not dynamic? Would it be considered just a blip in the writing? An accidental, unintentional addition to the narrative just to keep the reader interested? No. We know that the author does everything for a reason. Not one thing in this book was done purely for entertainment purposes, not even the names of the characters.

But can one character really be static and dynamic?

Traditionally, I believe that a character can only be one or the other; changing or unchanging. However, Holden seems to fall into a separate category. He seems to write his own literary rules for himself. He isn't a traditional case. I can find and agree with evidence for both sides; yes, Holden is static and yes, Holden is dynamic. Essentially, I believe that Holden can be a new type of character. He has aspects of inner change and lack thereof. Since he is the main character, he can confidently be anything the author wants him to be. An argument can be crafted for just about any metaphor, any analogy, any symbol, any characteristic of Holden Caulfield because this book is left so far open to interpretation. Why else would Mr. Scalia still be excited to learn something new from his students when it comes to reading the book if it wasn’t so open-ended with every piece of information?

I know this perspective might be slightly different than that of the basic yes/no, static/dynamic and I understand that it might seem to be off-prompt. However, I don’t plan to apologize for a different interpretation of the question because it was left open-ended for a reason. I, like J.D. Salinger, carefully thought out every aspect of my argument and article and I believe that, with evidence, this prompt can have a looser guideline.

(Despite my lack of apology I don’t intend any aggression so here’s a heart to make up for it!!)