The Catcher in the Rye

[alfaniner]

OK, I know this is supposed to be an "important" book and all, and loaded with "meaning", and I'm sure the hunting cap is supposed to "symbolize" something, but I found it incredibly boring. This is the first book I've read in a long time where I actually looked at the end to see how many pages I had to go.

A guy walks around and does stuff, but nothing much of consequence.

I picked it up quite a while ago as it was one of those books I'd heard about but never read. I like to read a lot, but I can imagine that if I were not a regular reader, and was forced to read this in high school, it might have turned me off from reading totally.

I just don't get it. What makes this book so important? I remember seeing a show several years ago, Lou Grant I think, where several books were in danger of being banned from somewhere. If I recall correctly, this was one of them, and one of the reporters was horrified, saying something like "I could never have gotten through being fourteen without having read that book." I don't see what he possibly could have gotten out of it that would be so life-changing.

Ok, so maybe the point was that the kid was boring and annoying, but I can be bored and annoyed in any number of ways. I don't want to be bored and annoyed when I'm reading a book!

[LibraryLady]

Originally posted by alfaniner

If I recall correctly, this was one of them, and one of the reporters was horrified, saying something like "I could never have gotten through being fourteen without having read that book."

There's your clue. The book is narrated by an insanely self-involved teenager. Okay, that's redundant. :) The book is beloved by self-involved teenagers, because it validates their feelings. I adored this when I was about thirteen. Reading it again about ten years ago, I was startled by how it could have been so important to me.

You read it too late.

[Kiless]

These of any use to you?

http://www.levity.com/corduroy/salinger1.htm
http://www.vqronline.org/viewmedia.php/prmMID/8295
http://www.americanpopularculture.com/archive/bestsellers/catcher.htm

(credit goes to http://www.teachingenglish.com.au)

:)

(and yes, I'm a fan, but I love his short stories more....)

[Ian Osborne]

I just wanted to give the kid a slap and remind him there's six billion people on the planet, not just him. It's like reading Lord Kenneth's life story.

For me, the key episode was where Holden Caulfield chatted to his one-time teacher, Mr. Antolini, about a class talk someone else had given a while back. Choosing to talk about sports (IIRC), the speaker was pulled up by the class for drifting off the subject. Caulfield didn't like this, and saw it as cramping the speaker's creativity. Antolini disagreed. "Don't you think he should've stuck to the chosen subject", he argued, "or if something else was more interesting, chosen that instead?" How the kid dealt with this could've opened up the book considerably, but instead of developing the point, Salinger had the teacher make a homosexual pass at the kid and the issue was neatly sidestepped.

It didn't make me want to shoot John Lennon either! :D

[Jas]

I never much liked the book. Holden pissed me off to no end. It's like '1984' - everyone else seems to love it, and I can't figure out what the big deal is.

[Jon.]

Originally posted by Jas
It's like '1984' - everyone else seems to love it, and I can't figure out what the big deal is.

Then you probably wouldn't appreciate the Ministry of Reshelving (http://www.flickr.com/groups/reshelving/).

[epepke]

Originally posted by Jas
I never much liked the book. Holden pissed me off to no end.

The trouble with Catcher in the Rye is that it isn't 1951 any more. We're just dripping in adolescent angst these days, so there's nothing about it that seems fresh or, for that matter, in any way needing to be written about.

[Piscivore]

I sort of thought the point of it was (as is the point of a lot of Salinger's stories) that Holden gets over it by observing the pure innocence of his sister- that no matter the crap life throws at you, no matter how cold, impersonal, or actively hostile the world, no matter how screwed up or self involved the person, there is light at the end of the tunnel.

Unless you are Seymour Glass.

[mjv]

Yay!

I have never met other people who also found this book a waste of the time to read it.

If you take out the bad words; it wouldn't have been banned; and we quite possibly wouldn't know it even was written.

MJV

[TragicMonkey]

Originally posted by Piscivore
Unless you are Seymour Glass.

Cold!

There's a bananafish reference in an Offspring song.

Question: Was Franny pregnant, and that's why she was sick and crying in the bathroom, or was she just suddenly disillusioned with the world and her jackass boyfriend? I incline toward the latter, but only because there's nothing in Zooey to suggest she's pregnant. But if you only read Franny, then it seems a fair possibility.

[TragicMonkey]

Originally posted by mjv
If you take out the bad words; it wouldn't have been banned; and we quite possibly wouldn't know it even was written.

The "sexual situations" would still offend, for starters.

More seriously is that any book where the hero challenges the authority of religion, his school, and his parents upsets some people. Unless of course the hero learns his lesson and toes the line.

To take an example from television, the "Parents Television Council" actually says "The Simpsons" is bad because it mocks "entrepreneurs, the clergy, the police, and teachers".

Scratch a prude and you'll find a control freak underneath.

[Piscivore]

Originally posted by TragicMonkey
Cold!

There's a bananafish reference in an Offspring song.

Question: Was Franny pregnant, and that's why she was sick and crying in the bathroom, or was she just suddenly disillusioned with the world and her jackass boyfriend? I incline toward the latter, but only because there's nothing in Zooey to suggest she's pregnant. But if you only read Franny, then it seems a fair possibility.

I haven't read either yet. :(

There's always been something more pressing, especially since I started working on my own book.

[Freakshow]

When I was in my early 20's, I was staying at a friend's house one night. I was looking for something to read, so I picked this up off their bookshelf and started reading it. I only read 20 or 30 pages. It didn't mean much to me...but I could tell that if I would have read it as a teenager, I would have thought it was the greatest book ever written. :)

I agree with another poster. You read it too late. So did I, which is why I quit after 20 or 30 pages. :)

[TragicMonkey]

Originally posted by Freakshow
When I was in my early 20's, I was staying at a friend's house one night. I was looking for something to read, so I picked this up off their bookshelf and started reading it. I only read 20 or 30 pages. It didn't mean much to me...but I could tell that if I would have read it as a teenager, I would have thought it was the greatest book ever written. :)

I agree with another poster. You read it too late. So did I, which is why I quit after 20 or 30 pages. :)

Catcher might be juvenile, but Salinger's other work is definitely worth reading. Nine Stories is good, Franny and Zooey (usually together in one volume) are better, and Seymour, An Introduction and Raise High the Roof Beam, Carpenter (also usually together) are his best. At the very least, the latter two contain one hell of a good reading list; if you read all the authors and philosophers mentioned in those books, you'll get everything from Basho to Epictetus, Sankaracharya to The Cloud of Unknowing. Salinger's writing might not be to everyone's taste, but he certainly is erudite in a surprisingly broad spectrum.

[orphia nay]

Count me as another fan of the book, or at least, I was.

I first picked it up as a teenager (16 or 17) one morning at school, and couldn't put it down. I finished it later that day. I remember thinking, "This is how I think, and I'm always going to think this way", and immediately read it again.

I read it at least once a year for at least 10 years, wearing out two copies of it. (I also read and enjoyed his other books.) I admit it's been a while since I read it though... without revealing my age... ;)


I don't see what he possibly could have gotten out of it that would be so life-changing.

Alfaniner, I guess it was the fact that Holden Caulfield went 'over the edge' and was coming to terms with things that made me want to see things from his perspective of hindsight without going through that much drama. (Didn't help, as it turned out, but we all have to learn our own lessons.;) )

OK, I know this is supposed to be an "important" book and all

The book must have had some effect - you sound like Holden - he says and all a lot! :)

[bruto]

Despite having been a pretty screwed-up adolescent when I read it, I never really could identify with Holden. I thought the book was pretty well written, but I just never could seem to connect with Holden's problems, which didn't seem similar to mine. He just seemed to be whining and going about it all wrong. I suppose in a way, though, that's the whole point, and one of the reasons that, even though, as I say, I didn't much like Holden, I rather liked the book. I saw touches of Holden in some of my contemporaries more than in myself.

One question I've always had, and never seen addressed, is whether or not Salinger intended the irony of using that Robert Burns verse. As I recall, Holden misremembers the word as "catch" instead of "meet," and has this image of himself as some kind of saver of innocence. As part of this crusade, he attempts to erase graffiti containing the "F" word. What I'd like to know, though, is whether Salinger was aware of the other, probably original, version of that Burns poem, the words to which are "If a body f*** a body, comin' thro the rye!"

[athon]

I hated teen angst when I was a teenager. I think I hated it more then than I do now, even. Maybe because I have to deal with it more now in an objective, 'adult' sense being a teacher.

But Catcher' was perhaps one of the worst, most ego-centric pieces of literature I ever had forced down my throat. I don't mind books I don't get; I hate books that are self-indulgent in their own rage.

Athon

[CplFerro]

I've read this one twice. I enjoyed it, but that's beside the point. These type of books are simply descriptions of something real. Saying we like or don't like it is like saying we like or don't like brainscans, or ecologies.

Caulfield might as well have been a real person, because there are real people like that. And that's all the book sets out to do, is paint something real.

[alfaniner]

My life is real, but detailing an average weekend wouldn't make all that interesting of a book.

This is the kind of book that people who don't read books think all books are like.

[CplFerro]

Originally posted by alfaniner
My life is real, but detailing an average weekend wouldn't make all that interesting of a book.

This is the kind of book that people who don't read books think all books are like.

If you were in the last few days of a breakdown crisis in response to the alienation of modernity, it might.

I tend to think that people who can't stomach Rye aren't going to be able to handle Moby Dick or The Commedia either; the world would not be a better place if they could be cajoled into reading pulp fantasy or comic books.

[Checkmite]

I've always hated "Catcher", and perhaps I always will. I was forced to read it in high school, right after "The Scarlet Letter", and I found the former to be more compelling in every respect. And I don't even really like "The Scarlet Letter".

As a teen of Mr. Caufield's age, I guess I was supposed to "relate" somehow. I'll I saw was some whiny bonehead of a kid complaining to his shrink about how much his life sucks thanks to himself. I hated it. Hated, hated, hated. I didn't turn in half of the chapter reviews.

Now, "Lord of the Flies" was some good stuff. I even admit to having something of a fondness for "Where the Red Fern Grows". And I'll have you all know that I appreciated and still own copies of "Moby Dick", "War and Peace", most (if not all) of Shakespeare's plays, "The Crucible", "Of Mice and Men", and numerous other examples of what most tend to describe as Great Literature.

"Catcher in the Rye" sucked, unbelievably.

[TragicMonkey]

Is it just me, or does reading a book for a high school class tend to ruin it? I think Catcher is one of those books it's best to read on your own, without an English teacher screwing it up. Something about English class just manages to suck the fun out of everything.

[bruto]

Originally posted by TragicMonkey
Is it just me, or does reading a book for a high school class tend to ruin it? I think Catcher is one of those books it's best to read on your own, without an English teacher screwing it up. Something about English class just manages to suck the fun out of everything.

I think there's something to that, though not as much for novels as for poetry. Nothing spoils poetry more than some bonehead English teacher who "knows" what it's about!

I had a few good teachers along the way, so I actually got something out of it when we did Moby Dick and some of those others. As for Catcher, I recall that I enjoyed the book, even though I thought then as I do now that Holden was a self-indulgent preppie twit. But there were plenty of those around, so I guess the book rang true in its own way even though I didn't see my own adolescent angst reflected in him.

[Dogdoctor]

It was required reading in my intermediate school. I read it but was bored by it. I had just found science fiction and prior to that had read the Hardy boys, James Bond series, Doc Savage, a bunch of biographies of famous people, and Hans Christian Anderson's Fairy Tales and the Brothers Grimm Fairy Tales. Anything was more interesting to me than that book. They also required 1984 by George Orwell which I found more interesting also.

[billydkid]

Originally posted by alfaniner
OK, I know this is supposed to be an "important" book and all, and loaded with "meaning", and I'm sure the hunting cap is supposed to "symbolize" something, but I found it incredibly boring. This is the first book I've read in a long time where I actually looked at the end to see how many pages I had to go.

A guy walks around and does stuff, but nothing much of consequence.

I picked it up quite a while ago as it was one of those books I'd heard about but never read. I like to read a lot, but I can imagine that if I were not a regular reader, and was forced to read this in high school, it might have turned me off from reading totally.

I just don't get it. What makes this book so important? I remember seeing a show several years ago, Lou Grant I think, where several books were in danger of being banned from somewhere. If I recall correctly, this was one of them, and one of the reporters was horrified, saying something like "I could never have gotten through being fourteen without having read that book." I don't see what he possibly could have gotten out of it that would be so life-changing.

Ok, so maybe the point was that the kid was boring and annoying, but I can be bored and annoyed in any number of ways. I don't want to be bored and annoyed when I'm reading a book!

When I was a teen I worshipped Salinger and Catcher. I really had a thing for his short stories. They really are perfect reads for certain types at that age. I did notice that the theme in every single Salinger story is exactly the same - contempt for the phoney, mundane everyday world until some moment of revelation and then appreciation for all that stuff you had contempt for. In my mind I was one of the Glass kids - never mind that I had absolutely nothing in common. For me, back then, it was all Salinger, Hemmingway and Updike. and a few New Yorker style short story writers.

[Georgieboy]

Originally posted by TragicMonkey
Is it just me, or does reading a book for a high school class tend to ruin it? I think Catcher is one of those books it's best to read on your own, without an English teacher screwing it up. Something about English class just manages to suck the fun out of everything.

I guess i can support that, its strange but for what i´ve seen it seems this book is a "must" in a lot of american schools, and when you must read something because your teacher told you so, and you are and adolescent and you hate everyone you will just hate this book.

Well, i read this book late, im mexican and i read some pretty crappy things in school, which may be great but i hate them right now, so i guess i have to read them again. Im almost 30 now and i read catcher in the rye a year ago, and i love it, i think it has a lot of levels of evocation and reading, and you have to make a difference between theme and story (plot?, sorry, my english is good but not so much :P ).

the story or plot is about a weekend in the life of an angry adolescent.

The theme is peering in the absurdity of the adult world, the innocence of childhood, losing hope, the anxiety of deciding if you will consciously try to forget all this and live a "normal" life.

I think it is one of the greatest books i´ve ever read and it´s been a big influence in my writing, i write some short stories and scripts, and one of my favorite themes is the absurdity in the way the world and human minds sometimes work... isnt that why we are here in this forum now?, i was very surprised to see so much people who hate or just dont like this book, but finally, appreciation is completely subjective, and thats fine.

And by the way, i hear (read) a lot of americans talk about this "teen angst", some kind of concept that seems to spread all around, but never heard about it or seen it as an important concept outside americans, i think its a shame to reduce something to "teen angst" and then just walk away from it because the word "teen" appears over there and "ah... im a grown up, i cant identify with that", existential angst is that, independent of your age, and i think that if we could hear adolescents more often we could learn a lot, its the time of change, rebellion, paradigms, learning, exploring, doubting... funny, again, just what we are suppossed to do in this forums and what we encourage other to do.

sorry for the super big post... :P

[Dogdoctor]

i was very surprised to see so much people who hate or just dont like this book, but finally, appreciation is completely subjective, and thats fine.
Beauty is in the eye of the beholder. I did not hate everyone but I can remember thinking "What an idiot this character is" and "the author must be an idiot also" and "I wonder if anyone actually thinks this way?". I also remember being happy that my reading speed was pretty high so I did not waste a lot of time reading it. At that point in my life I could read a whole book in one sitting (4 hours).

[bruto]

Originally posted by Dogdoctor
Beauty is in the eye of the beholder. I did not hate everyone but I can remember thinking "What an idiot this character is" and "the author must be an idiot also" and "I wonder if anyone actually thinks this way?". I also remember being happy that my reading speed was pretty high so I did not waste a lot of time reading it. At that point in my life I could read a whole book in one sitting (4 hours).

I had a pretty poor opinion of Holden when I was reading his story at approximately his age, but I never thought Salinger was an idiot. Whether or not you like Holden Caulfield, he's well enough written to have acquired a sort of literary personhood beyond the book itself, and when that happens, some credit is surely due to the author.

[Dogdoctor]

Originally posted by bruto
I had a pretty poor opinion of Holden when I was reading his story at approximately his age, but I never thought Salinger was an idiot. Whether or not you like Holden Caulfield, he's well enough written to have acquired a sort of literary personhood beyond the book itself, and when that happens, some credit is surely due to the author.
That may well be but I don't believe that I have read anything else he wrote. He can write as well as he wants but if the topic is boring to me then it won't impress me. In any case it is still a value judgment. So he might be quite the writer but I only saw this one work. For me I did not feel the story was real but a made up one and a boring one so I couldn't get into it. What else did he write?