Goodreads | Catch-22

topics	replies	views	last activity
The Next Best Boo...: What are your favorite classic novels?	147	350	3 hours, 30 min ago
The Book Challenge: Becky's Baker's Dozen Unread Classic Goal	1	7	4 days ago, 09:08AM
Spanning the Gamut: Choosing a book	7	6	21 days ago, 01:48PM
Book Buddies: Catch-22 Early Thoughts	3	2	26 days ago, 08:51AM
Any advice?	12	70	28 days ago, 01:11AM

Sarah rated it:

10/02/08

bookshelves: classics

Read in May, 2004

This review has been hidden because it contains spoilers. To view it, click here.

Here is the review I wrote back in the day--before I realized that this was really about the Cold War, but set in World War II and abou the absurdity of McCarthy-ism:

Not one of my favorites. The first half of the book was a bit tedious – introducing characters. Its supposed to be darkly humorous, but the parts that were supposed to be funny infuriated and frustrated me.

Set in Italy, second world war, combat unit. Main character: Yossarian. Basic message: hmmmm. Here it gets a bit...more Here is the review I wrote back in the day--before I realized that this was really about the Cold War, but set in World War II and abou the absurdity of McCarthy-ism:

Not one of my favorites. The first half of the book was a bit tedious – introducing characters. Its supposed to be darkly humorous, but the parts that were supposed to be funny infuriated and frustrated me.

Set in Italy, second world war, combat unit. Main character: Yossarian. Basic message: hmmmm. Here it gets a bit difficult. I’m going to read some books of criticism to make sure I’m walking away with the right impression. The leadership, higher ranking officials, are completely incompetent and illogical, seeking self-advancement in ridiculous ways. One colonel (Cathcart) continues to raise the number of missions men must fly before they get sent home; the original requirement is 40 and by the end, its double that. Everybody who dies should be sent home already, and there are plenty of replacements available – Cathcart just wants his unit to shine (so he looks good). It’s a completely arbitrary decision without any merit.

Towards the end, most of the favorite characters start dying one after another. They drop like flies (all the people I hate stay alive, of course). Oh yeah, then there’s an entrepreneur, Milo, who is a complete ass and gets away with helping both sides because he’s making a profit. Anyway, so everyone is dying – by getting shot down or disappearing or getting chopped in half accidentally by a propeller or committing suicide because he just accidentally chopped a kid in half. It’s all very delightful, and all the deaths come all of a sudden in the book (but not necessarily at the same time – the book jumps around quite a bit), followed by this horrible scene, where Yossarian runs off to Rome because he can’t handle all the deaths and doesn’t want to fight anymore – and he just sees horror after human horror while walking through the streets. A man beating a dog, a woman getting molested by several men while drunkenly begging “Pleesh no…”, a helpless pursuit, a child being beaten – while nobody in the crowd watching intervenes, a man holding his bleeding, toothless mouth in agony, a fellow soldier raping a maid and then killing her without repercussion.

That was the most powerful part of the book (I actually dissolved into tears). Captured hopelessness perfectly – like Camus – but only in that one part. The rest of the time I was just frustrated. But that part – Gawd. Everything about humanity and the world was despicable for those few pages, and I understood that feeling of despair perfectly.

That was the only part I was able to identify with Yossarian at all. He fought valiantly for awhile, up in his plane, until he witnessed a death, and then completely lost his appetite for war. It broke him, and he decided to call his superior officers on their illogical retardation, and he sa his participation in the war as needless. There were plenty of other men with higher morale, who were able tos tay without too much concern, some actually enjoying the battle, while Yossarian was full of fear and no longer able to deal psychologically with the constant danger. Part of that makes sense, but then start letting some guys off the hook and everybody wants that same exception. The war was necessary, and entering the battle was voluntary (I don’t think anybody was drafted) – but there’s only so much people can take before they reach their breaking point. The message of the book wasn’t so much that the war itself was ridiculous, but that the attitudes of people in positions of leadership were callous and flippant about people’s lives. Nothing that they did made moral sense. In the end, Yossarian found hope to escape. Gail, my boss at the library, encouraged me that the end was a burst of hope, so maybe my expectations were too high.

I read it in the first place because I was tired of hearing references to a Catch-22 and having no idea what that meant. The rule is, you have to be crazy to be sent home – and then all you have to do is ask and you get to leave. However, asking is proof of sanity, so you obviously aren’t crazy. No way out. What seems a simple way out screws you over.

Couple of lines I liked: “The amazing place was a fertile, seething cornucopia of female nipples and navels.” “Nately’s mother, a descendent of the New England Thorntons, was a Daughter of the American Revolution. His father was a Son of a Bitch.”
...less

Like this review? yes

add a comment

Kelly rated it:

09/08/08

bookshelves: fiction

Read in August, 2008

My relationship with this book was somewhat quixotic. The first few chapters made me smile- in a bitter, ironic, wise-at-life sort of way of course. I loved the cleverness and deceptive punch-you-in-the-side way that Heller made his points, wrapped up in the whirling, hilariously awful world that he's created in depicting a tired, worn out unit towards the end of WWII in Italy. The choice of the main character in the bombardier Yossarian, a man who saw one too many horrors, is perfect. His quest...more My relationship with this book was somewhat quixotic. The first few chapters made me smile- in a bitter, ironic, wise-at-life sort of way of course. I loved the cleverness and deceptive punch-you-in-the-side way that Heller made his points, wrapped up in the whirling, hilariously awful world that he's created in depicting a tired, worn out unit towards the end of WWII in Italy. The choice of the main character in the bombardier Yossarian, a man who saw one too many horrors, is perfect. His questioning, questionable state of mind is perfect to depict all the contradictions, paradoxes, hidden, buried ideas that nobody wants to talk about during a war, and the sheer absurdism of the life soldiers lived, even in our "good war" of the 20th century. One understands Heller's rage at the blind torpor of a society that prefers to be lead and blame someone else for what happens. This particular unit is under special strain, as their commander orders them to fly more combat missions than any other unit, and then continually raises the number each time his men see a glimpse of their time to go home. The endless, senseless, everyday cruelty inflicted both on their surroundings and on each other slowly grinds the unit's minds and bodies into dust.

I almost wonder if when this was published, Heller was afraid that his audience would be inclined to put this book down as quickly as possible. It was one of my issues with the book that he seemed to throw out all his major questions, issues, wild emotions and ultimate points within the first few chapters, so that for awhile afterwards, it did all seem very monotonously repetitive, as we saw more and more ways of saying exactly the same thing in pretty near exactly the same formula. Perhaps absurdism is merely more effective in short form, as there was a period of the book where I was rolling my eyes and seeing shades of Catcher in the Rye's blind "Fuck the man!" screaming enough to only grudgingly read on. I understand that it may have been part of his point to illustrate that the absurdism of war does go on and on and on, but it did become something of a chore to read in the middle. Deceptively light comedy can't go on like that without at least hints at some deeper pathos that we don't have to assume is there. Also, the attitude that Heller is espousing, and the earnest questions he asks do feel somewhat dated. Not their message, of course. That is universal. Questioning authority, the value of life, the cost of war, the meaning of country and honor and duty, etc. But there is a phrasing that places it firmly in its time, which does seperate you from it a bit. I also found it all somewhat bleak and cold in tone, and not in a way that I wanted to spend time with at all. This middle section would be the reason that it took me so long to finish this book.

However. After I passed the halfway mark, my opinion improved once more. The character drawing, while still absurd enough to bring a wry smile to my face, was poignant enough that I started to get more involved. I needed to see layers. I needed to see the inner roiling turmoil, I needed to see the thoughts of these desperate men as they went about their tragically ridiculous lives, and see what it was that made them survive, or finally give up. It also helped that we saw more to Yossarian to make him a fully fledged person, rather than merely a conduit for the major points of the book. Perhaps I'm not saying this correctly, but while I can react critically to a character who is presented as a symbol, I can't be truly drawn to reading more about them unless I'm presented with more to see. In any case, I thought the last half intermittently, and particularly the last hundred and fifty pages or so were absolutely heartbreaking. In the end, Heller does make you both grieve and rejoice, and the story fulfills the promise of what I had hoped that it would be after its manically brilliant introduction.

All in all, it is a novel absolutely worth its "classic," name. It is worth reading to remind you of the many different perspectives that are available on an issue, to think critically about even concepts that you've never had to question before. Nothing is given. It is always worthwhile to be reminded of that.

...less

Like this review? yes (2 people liked it)

8 comments

Zinta rated it:

11/04/07

bookshelves: fiction

Read in July, 2006

For so many of us growing up in the USA, our high school teachers assigned us Joseph Heller's "Catch-22" as required reading, and I was among those assignees. I'm not sure why the requirement, other than perhaps some Catch-22 type of logic that everyone else was assigning it, so there, must be great, must read. I don't particularly remember liking the novel then, perhaps with no more substantial of a reason than -- just not my style. Reading the novel now, in midlife, my opinion (or my...more For so many of us growing up in the USA, our high school teachers assigned us Joseph Heller's "Catch-22" as required reading, and I was among those assignees. I'm not sure why the requirement, other than perhaps some Catch-22 type of logic that everyone else was assigning it, so there, must be great, must read. I don't particularly remember liking the novel then, perhaps with no more substantial of a reason than -- just not my style. Reading the novel now, in midlife, my opinion (or my literary style) has changed little, but today, I can attempt to add to "not my style" perhaps a few deeper insights.

In this second read, I realize what so fails to appeal to me is Heller's slapstick, absurdist, repetitive and dizzyingly circular style of storytelling. At the same time, I fully realize this is also the appeal of the novel for many: it's absurdity. Indeed, time has tested Heller's topic of war having little logic or reason in the real world, mostly born of individual and governmental insanity, power plays and mere whim, male ego clashing and chest thumping. Few wars seem to have good reason for happening when one considers all the other possibilities of resolution. While leaders sit safely in secure offices on fortressed hilltops, the common soldier takes all the risks, offers up his/her body for battering, endures indescribable torments in battle, and often gives the ultimate sacrifice of life. Shall we debate the virtues of boxing rings for political leaders instead? Yes, war is absurd. And Heller captures this "crazy-making" truth in a crazy-making novel in which characters dance to illogical commands, spin in frustration, and dig themselves in ever deeper as they try harder and harder to dig themselves out. You know... as in war.

So I slogged through the pages like a good soldier. Characters leapt forward and backward in time, one event led to no other event, resolution rarely made a showing, and the dance of insanity kept the main lead. Even as I slogged, I could not deny what an excellent reflection of warring reality Heller's writing proved to be. Kudos for that. Redeeming factor.

And then, somewhere towards the final pages, I was somewhat won over. Without losing his voice of absurdity, the author had Yossarian, key player, say lines so absurd they rang true to the core, e.g. "but we don't want what we want!" and I could only shake my head and echo, oh indeed. We don't. When offered a bounty of temptations to sell out his soul, Yossarian denied them all, and in his crazy way, spoke utter sanity. How common is it to want something desperately much of our lives, only to realize we don't want it at all when fantasy turns into reality? A gold star for the author. Other episodes of Yossarian struggling to keep a fellow soldier alive even as his guts spill out, the sheer horror and despair and helplessness of the situation, hit target. Bravo.

This, and Heller's commentaries on man being little more than meat, fodder for the brutalities of war, resounded with such painful truth that today's reader can only look up at current events and current disasters and realize -- we are living in a world ruled by absurdities even today. History has taught us nothing.

And so, I could be convinced that Heller's novel is a classic. Perhaps it is. ...less

Like this review? yes (3 people liked it)

6 comments

Caroline rated it:

07/09/08

bookshelves: 40-books-in-2008

joseph heller's novel, written in 1961, has been on my list for years, since i never read it as a young adult. he is without a doubt one of the best writers of our time in that he can transplant you into a both humorous and terrifying situations you never thought you'd be a part of. it's almost as if he's written a screenplay...

i am so perplexed by heller's presentation of time. it seems as if events are occurring side-by-side that never happened that way in "real" time. flashba...more joseph heller's novel, written in 1961, has been on my list for years, since i never read it as a young adult. he is without a doubt one of the best writers of our time in that he can transplant you into a both humorous and terrifying situations you never thought you'd be a part of. it's almost as if he's written a screenplay...

i am so perplexed by heller's presentation of time. it seems as if events are occurring side-by-side that never happened that way in "real" time. flashbacks are inserted without warning, and diversions from stories are very common. it can be both enlightening and frustrating at the same time, but certainly creative and bold.

i love the theme of sex in this book - it seems to be a running joke that none of these enlisted men seem to know what the hell they're doing in the bedroom. or that everything kinda turns to disaster when they try. or maybe go hellishly wrong.

i think heller has some very strong ideas about the government (or what the critics of this book call "bureaucratic operation and reasoning". he probably sees most of this operation as a big joke, as he may have experienced -- i did a little research about heller, and apparently he joined the army at age 19 and flew as a bombardier in Italy during world war II. i'm sure then, a lot of the events that took place in the book are probably one he actually went through.

the fourth-to-last chapter, the eternal city, seems to reveal many ideas heller has about what he sees in society -- deja vu of events yossarian actually saw minutes prior. yet he doesn't come to anyone's aid because no one asks for his help.

besides all this, some of my personal favorite moments were:

the scene with yossarian and milo sitting in the tree, while yossarian is naked. milo pulls out the chocolate-covered cotton. brilliant dialogue. awesome descriptions of clouds, etc. then the story continues when through the chaplain's eyes later in the novel.

the chapters on milo the militant and milo the mayor. unbelievable hilarity in these chapters - i am astounded to know of all the thoughts running through heller's mind. he is a renegade of importing and exporting, and the series of events are truly genius on heller's part.

any scene with nately's whore and kid sister. i literally laughed out loud at the end of the book when she kept showing up. and funny that yossarian's wound in the end came from her and not from a wound in battle. this illustrates heller's idea that the military and all it's operations are absurdly absurd. like, what the hell are they doing, anyway? flying missions but really going to purchase cotton from egypt? hahahaa.

but on the flipside, i can see how readers would become annoyed at his style of writing. it goes on and on.... sometimes i had to take breaks, but in the end it was worth reading the whole book.

go forth and read this one!
<3

...less

Like this review? yes

add a comment

Jesse rated it:

09/14/08

Catch-22 is probably one of the best books I've read in a while. I could really identify with how Yossarian felt torn between his desire to remain loyal to his friends and country on the one hand, and his desire on the other hand to survive the war and escape the arbitrary and idiotic requirements imposed upon him by his superior officers, whose reckless, bureaucratic ambitions go completely unchecked. I also liked the book for its critique of bureaucracy in general: Heller never misses a chan...more Catch-22 is probably one of the best books I've read in a while. I could really identify with how Yossarian felt torn between his desire to remain loyal to his friends and country on the one hand, and his desire on the other hand to survive the war and escape the arbitrary and idiotic requirements imposed upon him by his superior officers, whose reckless, bureaucratic ambitions go completely unchecked. I also liked the book for its critique of bureaucracy in general: Heller never misses a chance to point out the ridiculous inefficiency of bureaucracy, its reliance on procedure over intelligence, its susceptibility to manipulation and abuse, and its detached indifference to the human lives it destroys.

Another remarkable aspect of Catch-22 is that some of the funniest moments in the book are also among the most disturbing, as various characters rub up against the machinery of bureaucracy and are helpless to resist its crushing irrationality. Probably the most famous expression of this absurdity is Yossarion's first encounter with Catch-22, when he asks to be grounded due to insanity. In response, he's told that, to be grounded for insanity, a pilot must ask to be grounded - but any pilot who asks to be grounded is sane by definition, since sane people would never want to fly a deadly bombing mission. By this reasoning the pilots are forced to either fly the ever-increasing number of missions arbitrarily required of them by Colonel Cathcart (for the sole purpose of earning him a promotion to general), or else desert their country and leave their friends to fly their missions in their place.

In this regard Catch-22 feels slightly different than some of the more recent anti-war efforts, because bureaucracy and senseless suffering receive the novel's sharpest criticism rather than America's motives for fighting. Yossarian never really questions whether fighting the war itself is the right thing to do; in fact, he would probably feel that it would be wrong not to fight the war, that there are some things worth dying for. But he's also unwilling to die simply to further the ambitions of Colonel Cathcart, which is very different than being unwilling to die for his country. The question then becomes how to save his own life from useless destruction without betraying his country or his friends. If his life is all he has, should he save it by any means necessary? Or are some values more important than survival? Yossarian's response, as he puts it, is to live forever or die trying. With all that said, for me the best part of the book was just caring about Yossarian and his friends and hoping everything would come out all right in the end. Yossarian is one of the most likeable characters I've ever encountered, and my main thought throughout the book was simple: "Let Yossarian live!" Great book....less

Like this review? yes

add a comment

Krys added it

02/07/08

Read in January, 2008

recommends it for: anyone

Yossarian, a bombardier, is terrified that thousands of people he doesn't know are trying to kill him while he serves on the Italian front. It is also about those that victimize for the sake of power and status and those that are victimized. The book begins en medias res in the hospital with Yossarian and his cohorts, all healthy soldiers feigning sickness in order to avoid more military action. The book follows their hapless missions as they are used by Colonel Peckham in order to improve his c...more Yossarian, a bombardier, is terrified that thousands of people he doesn't know are trying to kill him while he serves on the Italian front. It is also about those that victimize for the sake of power and status and those that are victimized. The book begins en medias res in the hospital with Yossarian and his cohorts, all healthy soldiers feigning sickness in order to avoid more military action. The book follows their hapless missions as they are used by Colonel Peckham in order to improve his chances for appearing on the cover of Life Magazine or becoming a general. On the way, you're treated to Miles Minderbinder's capitalist ventures that make the scalawags in the Civil War south look like saints, Major Major Major Major's disappearing acts, the chaplain's mistaken visions that help him retain his faith, and a healthy dosage of mysogeny (Heller is yet another talented wirter who really doesn't even attempt to understand women).

Technically, there are so many things to admire in this book. The orderly sense of traditional chronology is disrupted to reflect the chaotic and highwire experiences of war. For one, a traditional chronological narrative is substituted by repetitive patterns: each chapter, again, titled by a different character, Yossarian at various stages of his attempts to depart the military, the soldier Snowden's moment and manner of death as Yossarian watched on, the number of missions the soldiers are told to complete before being discharged, and catch-22 itself. The characters are stylized, exaggerated versions of people. The sweetspot between the everyman and the individual, as Charlie D'Ambrosio put it. The pace is manic but also slow when it needs to be. The comic tone never diminishes the anger of the book ("Men went mad and were rewarded with medals", "There was a much lower death rate inside the hospital than outside the hospital"), but rather, as Wilhelm Barnhardt roughly put it, the tone and the material are at odds with each other, which, in my opinion, creates friction, or energy, between the tone and content of Catch-22.

But most of all, it's an important, angry, felt book, that does all of this not by lecturing, but by entertaining in a language that feels invented by Heller. This writing is audacious, daring, not carefully literary and lifeless like so many hailed writers--Heller does not know how to write an uninteresting sentence. Dialogue rarely gets this strange or this good, the political and social issues of modern man rarely gets so depicted so humorously or accurately. It's my second reading of this novel, and it's stunned me as much as it had the first time. ...less

Like this review? yes

add a comment

Gregory rated it:

04/24/08

bookshelves: favorites

Read in June, 2007

recommends it for: Fans of Kurt Vonnegut, lit lovers, et al

“Immoral logic seemed to be confounding him at every turn”

To immerse yourself in the WWII-era nightmare at the heart of Joseph Heller’s masterful novel is to lose yourself in a world where bureaucracy has run amuck, logic and sanity have become rare commodities, and the threat of imminent death permeates the very air. And yet, the only person who can see all of this is Yossarian, a bombardier who has the misfortune to be stuck in a war while being, as the dust-jacket points o...more “Immoral logic seemed to be confounding him at every turn”

To immerse yourself in the WWII-era nightmare at the heart of Joseph Heller’s masterful novel is to lose yourself in a world where bureaucracy has run amuck, logic and sanity have become rare commodities, and the threat of imminent death permeates the very air. And yet, the only person who can see all of this is Yossarian, a bombardier who has the misfortune to be stuck in a war while being, as the dust-jacket points out, “dangerously sane.” He is terrified by the dangers that surround him, disgusted by the wanton behavior of his compatriots, and angered by the selfishness of his superiors. He just wants to go home and leave all this behind him, but that seems to be an impossible dream. The closer he gets to the end of his tour, the further he gets from going home as power-hungry, image conscious superiors concoct new ways to extend the number of missions their pilots must fly. This is a war where the accuracy of a bombing run is seen as irrelevant so long as it photographs well (a pretty explosion is all part of the CO’s PR campaign), a mess hall officer can run an international business that makes him the most powerful man in the unit, and a dead body can be allowed to lie around without getting removed if that officer’s paperwork never arrived (making him never officially exist to the bureaucrats), and more. The logic that they and all characters except Yossarian use is utterly absurd, lending “Catch-22” a farcical air, but the genius of Heller’s work is that their outrageous logic is actually an only mildly exaggerated version of the logic that we are forced to abide by in everyday life. You can read in his inspired satire the problems that plague any bureaucracy, whether it is as mundane as the office or as vital as the government.

“Catch-22” is outrageous, yes, and that may turn some readers off, but it is a novel that has a devilish heart and a wicked wit at its core – not to mention the fact that it is sheer genius, and it isn’t as far-fetched or outlandish as it may initially appear. Heller’s tone is pitch-perfect and never wavers, and his vision has made “Catch-22” a timeless classic that is every bit as relevant today as it was when it was first published. An absolute must-read.

Grade: A+

P.S. If you like this check out Kurt Vonnegut, another spectacular absurdist author. I’d recommend “Slaughterhouse Five” or my personal favorite, “Mother Night.”...less

Like this review? yes

add a comment

Taka rated it:

07/09/08

bookshelves: american_lit, japan_jul07-present

Read in July, 2008

Hard to say--

There is no sustained, overarching story. The book is very much episodic and repetitive with all the 41 chapters loosely strung together in a kind of haphazard way. In fact, many of the chapters tell the same events without any sense of direction or purpose. I'm not opposed to artistic and unconventional writing to make some larger point about the world as long as every - or almost every - bit of it counts and is enjoyable, which is to say, if the author can pull it off right. T...more Hard to say--

There is no sustained, overarching story. The book is very much episodic and repetitive with all the 41 chapters loosely strung together in a kind of haphazard way. In fact, many of the chapters tell the same events without any sense of direction or purpose. I'm not opposed to artistic and unconventional writing to make some larger point about the world as long as every - or almost every - bit of it counts and is enjoyable, which is to say, if the author can pull it off right. The risk of doing that, though, is that it may make the story not as engaging as it could be (e.g. Beckett's trilogy).

And in my humble opinion, Heller doesn't pull it off right. I think much of Catch-22 is unnecessary and can be cut without undermining the integrity of the book. I really thought Heller didn't need all 453 pages to make his point about the ridiculousness of war and bureaucracy. In fact, I got it in the first 100 pages. Though I really enjoyed reading about the rise of Milo's international syndicate, I had a hard time focusing and kept falling asleep at places.

The characters are all pretty flimsy - as so often happens with comedies -but that's OK because as long as there is a good story, it really doesn't matter.

But there is no story either. Hmph.

I hear it took the author 10 years to finish the novel. 10 years! It makes perfect sense, then, that there is no overarching story. I could see the author keep writing and writing and got lost in that 10 years and had no clue what he was writing about and ended up producing this hodgepodge of random, redundant, unnecessarily long book without any unifying story to string all the chapters together in a satisfying way.

And the writing. The first half reminds me of Kurt Vonnegut - simple, sometimes even simplistic, with short sentences (and I'm not a fan of Vonnegut)- and the second half reminds me of Neal Stephenson (who is one of my favorites), with a lot of idioms and slang interspersed with obscure words (exophthalmic, amyotrophic, acrimonious, etc.). I know Heller came before Vonnegut and Stephenson and Pynchon and all the major postmodern authors. But I just wasn't impressed with his prose.

So, some funny moments, easy to read, but no unifying story, no characters you can identify with, random episodes most of which are mediocre, and unnecessarily long.

2 = it was OK...less

Like this review? yes

1 comments

Dusty rated it:

02/28/08

Read in February, 2008

Paradoxes, especially those settled down in fun little hypothetical logic puzzles, are the domain of socially inept little boys (mostly) who were given books about Mensa as gifts from distant relatives who had no other clues about what sorts of presents would be well received. In Heller's novel, they're the domain of such boys all grown up, now finding themselves through some connection or another running a war in the Mediterranean. Colonel Cathcart, Colonel Korn, General Dreedle, et al., are th...more Paradoxes, especially those settled down in fun little hypothetical logic puzzles, are the domain of socially inept little boys (mostly) who were given books about Mensa as gifts from distant relatives who had no other clues about what sorts of presents would be well received. In Heller's novel, they're the domain of such boys all grown up, now finding themselves through some connection or another running a war in the Mediterranean. Colonel Cathcart, Colonel Korn, General Dreedle, et al., are the bad guys in this war novel, not solely because they're in charge (though this surely is a lot of it in such an anti-establishment novel as this one), but because they revel in the niggling little paradox games they come up with to avoid any direct responsibility.

For a while they're funny. Major Major Major Major (oh, the hilarity) realizes that if he makes a rule wherein the only time people can see him in his office is when he's not in, he never has to face a single problem. Colonel Korn can avoid the tough questions by making rules that the only people who are allowed at the education sessions to ask questions are those who never ask questions.

But then Aarfy comes in—Aarfy, you may remember, is the guy who rapes that Italian woman because he proudly never pays for sex, and then throws her out the window, killing her, because he can't have her going around saying terrible things about him. Aarfy's not an uppity-up, he's a regular army guy going on all these missions with the rest of them. He's also, as one of my students said, "A total douchebag": "Back in school we were always doing things like that. I remember one day we tricked these two dumb high-school girls from town into the fraternity house and made them put out for all the fellows there who wanted them by threatening to call up their parents and say they were putting out for us. We kept them trapped in bed there for more than ten hours. We even smacked their faces a little when they started to complain. Then we took away their nickels and dimes and chewing gum and threw them out" (251).

This novel is one where so many good people die, and though Yossarian lives, Aarfy does, too.

In comedy writing, injustice is funny. I read that somewhere recently....less

Like this review? yes (1 person liked it)

add a comment

Beryl rated it:

11/26/07

Read in January, 2007

If you have not read Catch 22, you’re in luck, because now you have something to look forward to. It is dry, it is wry, it is hilarious. It is not for the impatient. It took me forever to read, because frankly it is so easy to put down. Luckily, I found it equally easy to pick back up. I think a lot of people don’t like this book because they think it has no plot. In fact, a lot of avid plot-seekers probably never make it to the end. To them I say, wrong, it does have a plot. But even...more If you have not read Catch 22, you’re in luck, because now you have something to look forward to. It is dry, it is wry, it is hilarious. It is not for the impatient. It took me forever to read, because frankly it is so easy to put down. Luckily, I found it equally easy to pick back up. I think a lot of people don’t like this book because they think it has no plot. In fact, a lot of avid plot-seekers probably never make it to the end. To them I say, wrong, it does have a plot. But even I would have to admit that the plot that winds up developing is not enough to keep you going, you really have to read this book for the writing and the sarcasm and the hilarity. Here is something to love: the dialogue. In every chapter there were pieces of dialogue that were so good I would have to re-read the whole section, which is another reason it took me forever to read the book
Another thing to love: that it tells not shows. I did not get that backwards. I mean it. After two months of this creative writing class and 23 people being completely obsessed with showing, showing, showing, I was glad to be reading something that would just tell. And as a bonus, there was no vivid fictional dream, I hardly had a clue what the setting looked like. Fantastic. I should be more specific about the telling vs. showing. The actual action was largely told. But the point the book was making was never made explicit. It was all shown, to the point that a lot a people probably miss it altogether and walk away feeling like they just read a book with no point at all. And a lot was shown in the dialogue, a lot of the nonsense and craziness and disorder. A lot was shown in the rules that were made and followed, even though in describing the rules and the resultant action, it was all told.
Another thing to love: the characters. If you don’t want to read the whole book, just read the chapter about Major Major Major Major. Poor guy.
I read this book chapter to chapter, almost like it was a collection of short stories, and I was sorry to see it end. Ultimately for me, the book was about the pointlessness and idiocy of war, and I figure that the lack of plot and direction in the book was a reflection of that sentiment.

...less

Like this review? yes (1 person liked it)

add a comment

John rated it:

06/25/08

recommends it for: CNN armchair warriors

Catch-22 is a difficult book to review. By bringing absurdism into the area of war (and particularly the Second World War, the last "good war" America fought in), Heller knowingly risks offending people's sensitivities. So be it. Heller justifies all in the name of art and morality, and I embrace that justification. This book is definitely "worth its salt", to quote one of the many running gags within.

Yossarian is a Bombardier in a USAAF bomber squadron in the Mediterrane...more Catch-22 is a difficult book to review. By bringing absurdism into the area of war (and particularly the Second World War, the last "good war" America fought in), Heller knowingly risks offending people's sensitivities. So be it. Heller justifies all in the name of art and morality, and I embrace that justification. This book is definitely "worth its salt", to quote one of the many running gags within.

Yossarian is a Bombardier in a USAAF bomber squadron in the Mediterranean. He fears death and wishes to survive the war. In trying to escape combat duty on a medical exemption he encounters the paradoxical "catch" embodied in the title, which has since entered the language:

"There was only one catch and that was Catch-22, which specified that a concern for one's own safety in the face of dangers that were real and immediate was the process of a rational mind. Orr was crazy and could be grounded. All he had to do was ask; and as soon as he did, he would no longer be crazy and would have to fly more missions. Orr would be crazy to fly more missions and sane if he didn't, but if he was sane he had to fly them. If he flew them he was crazy and didn't have to; but if he didn't want to he was sane and had to. Yossarian was moved very deeply by the absolute simplicity of this clause of Catch-22 and let out a respectful whistle."
"That's some catch, that catch-22," he observed.
"It's the best there is," Doc Daneeka agreed."

This is a clever and well-written book which demands rereading in these gung-ho times. One may disagree with Heller's cynicism on war ("Open your eyes, Clevinger. It doesn't make a damned bit of difference who wins the war to someone who's dead.") but anyone has to acknowledge Heller's talent with words. As a dead war veteran himself, Heller, like Vonnegut (whose wonderful "Slaughterhouse-5" should be read alongside this book), is impregnably immune to the carping of war-loving critics who, like George W Bush, had something better to do when the opportunity to fight arose....less

Like this review? yes (1 person liked it)

add a comment

Teresa rated it:

08/12/07

bookshelves: readandreviewed

Read in August, 2005

"I really do admire you a bit. You're an intelligent person of great moral character who has taken a very courageous stand. I'm an intelligent person with no moral character at all, so I'm in an ideal position to appreciate it." - Colonel Cathcart, Catch-22

I really appreciate it when a book respects the intelligence of its readership. If a book is going to be "experimental" in any way, I love those that throw you into a world with no explanations - a literary baptism of f...more "I really do admire you a bit. You're an intelligent person of great moral character who has taken a very courageous stand. I'm an intelligent person with no moral character at all, so I'm in an ideal position to appreciate it." - Colonel Cathcart, Catch-22

I really appreciate it when a book respects the intelligence of its readership. If a book is going to be "experimental" in any way, I love those that throw you into a world with no explanations - a literary baptism of fire (ie: Orwell's "Animal Farm"). Catch-22 is one of those books, and that's part of the reason why I thought it was so amazing!

Catch-22 tells the story of a US Army squadron based in Italy during WWII, and a disenchanted pilot named Yossarian who thinks everyone is trying to kill him. (not an unreasonable assumption in a war) Except that it's not an Italy, a military story, or a world that we're meant to immediately recognize. There is a logic in the book that all the characters seem to accept, but that doesn't make sense to the reader. Or, alternately, it makes too much sense to the reader, and that's when the book hits you hard. You start falling into it. You start siding with people. Then all of a sudden, you realize that you're siding with the wrong people. You start thinking to yourself how could I be agreeing with this asshole?! How can I be laughing! My favorite books are the ones that elicit visceral reactions from me...my chest gets tight, my stomach gets tied in knots, and I can't explain why I'm reacting positively/negatively - I just know that I am. There were so many of those moments in this book, I can't even begin to describe them all...

One of the things that impressed me most was the structure of the book - how all at once it seemed both haphazard, and entirely calculated. How each segment could stand alone, but that together they weaved an intricate, thought-provoking story...
If you like historical novels, if you like political novels, if you like in-depth characters, if you like humor, if you like to think - I would highly recommend this book to you.
...less

Like this review? yes (3 people liked it)

add a comment

Lis rated it:

08/30/07

bookshelves: 2007-reads

Read in August, 2007

recommends it for: everyone

i absolutely loved this book. It took me all of august to read it. i usually rush through books. if they take one day, great, but a week gets to be too long. this took a month because i wanted it to, because i refused to let it go. sorry for stalling the book club, girls!

my first impression was that it reminded me of the tv show mash. it is very funny in a this-shouldn't-be-funny sort of way. it is complete and utter nonsense, and way too relevant today. i swear bush must have gotten quotes ...more

Like this review? yes

1 comments

Kristen rated it:

05/04/08

Read in April, 2008

recommends it for: no one

So, I really hated this book. I was very excited to read it because I had heard it was different and funny but it turned out to be slow and pointless. But I understand that it was one of the first books that showed that war was not just a romanticized getaway, it showed war was awful and everyone was treated badly. So I understand this book was significant.
I am thinking the protagonist is supposed to be Yossarian but I do not really see how he is a protagonist. He was not particularly a g...more

Like this review? yes

3 comments

Dhiraj rated it:

(review of isbn 0099477319)

05/26/07

bookshelves: booksthatmakeyouthink

recommends it for: All

An extremely profound book which most people dismiss as a humorous book.Catch 22 is an intense black comedy which gives you an insight into what people do when faced with imminent danger/death. All the characters are unique in their own ways and yet you can relate to them in some way or the other. Major Major is a hated guy only because he is a non-conformist, which encompasses being good to people, being polite, honourable and being a devout Christian. The book brings about quite lucidly...more

Like this review? yes (1 person liked it)

add a comment

Daniel rated it:

03/06/08

Read in March, 2008

Catch-22

discuss this book

groups with this book

friend reviews (0)

lists with this book

other reviews (showing 1-20 of 32683)