Many critics admired even more “Nine Stories,” which came out in 1953 and helped shape later writers like Mr. Roth, John Updike and Harold Brodkey. The stories were remarkable for their sharp social observation, their pitch-perfect dialogue (Mr. Salinger, who used italics almost as a form of musical notation, was a master not of literary speech but of speech as people actually spoke it), and for the way they demolished whatever was left of the traditional architecture of the short story — the old structure of beginning, middle, end — in favor of an architecture of emotion, in which a story could turn on a tiny alteration of mood or irony. Mr. Updike said he admired “that open-ended Zen quality they have, they way they don’t snap shut.”
I should have a Caulfield-esque response. But I don't.
I've always liked Salinger stories.
The highest sign of love I can give a book is when I still remember the time and place and feelings when I read them. I remember reading "Catcher" and "Nine Stories" clearly, including being conflicted about how much I liked them since I wanted to be more critical of them.