Well said.

Thank you!

totally disagree that people who relate to holden see in themselves a misunderstood warrior poet. holden is supposed to be loathsome, the book makes that pretty obvious.

I find it interesting that you think of Salinger as a "one-trick-pony." Have you read any of his other work? Personally, I think his other stories are much better than this one.

Kari,

I agree with you that Holden is unpleasant but I don't think that most of the book's fans hold this opinion.

Kristen,

I was referring to that fact that none of his other works is anywhere near as highly regarded as Catcher but no, I haven't read them, and you may well be right.

I totally agree with you. Either you hate holden or you love him. To me, he's the biggest whiner in the world. And that's why I couldn't stand a page of Catcher in the Rye.

dense review. Obviously Holden is hypocritical. That's the whole point.

This review is dead on aligned to my feelings of "catcher". It got incredibly tedious and I kept waiting for something waiting major to happen; I suppose it's a function of 21st century sensibilities.

I'm won't be highly recommending this one. I really won't :)

M

This was definitely a review that I wasn't expecting! I hold a similar view in that either you like the book or you don't, and very often this view centers around Holden himself.

I think, you don't really understand the book at all, and neither do any of the people who like Holden. Holden is the prime example of a hypocritical teenager, who knows nothing, and knows he knows nothing, and ruins himself in a few days. When reading this book, one is meant to observe the story, as it is told by a very unlikable character. Holden is intolerable, but fascinating. The world through his eyes is a world I have never seen, and I read, and re-read this amazing novel, each time finding the absolute brilliance of Salinger's words. And calling one of the most brilliant character writers a one-trick-pony is a very dense and unintelligent statement made by someone who has obviously not read his other work.

and ahh, the brilliance of a corrupted adolescent who wants more than anything to protect innocence is something that would drive anyone mad. He wants to catch the children from falling out of the innocent world in which they play. Just the utter brilliance of his immature corrupted character who wants to devote his life to saving children

Meghanangier wrote: "I think, you don't really understand the book at all, and neither do any of the people who like Holden. Holden is the prime example of a hypocritical teenager, who knows nothing, and knows he knows..."

I'm sorry Meghanangier, I say this with no disrespect meant to you in the slightest, but I am very tired of being told that I 'don't understand' the novel, just because I don't love it like other people seem to. I understand about being a hypocritical teenager; I am one myself! That doesn't mean I have to love the novel. I understand its sentiment but I don't like how it is written at all as I didn't engross me in the way, to me, a good novel should.

And I don't feel that expressing an opinion about Salinger's work means someone is 'unintelligent' just because they do not understand the hype.

Salinger wasn't a one-trick pony. He wrote until he died, but he didn't want to deal with publishers. Instead he published short stories in magazines and newspapers. He said, and I quote "It's almost unbearable for me to realize that my book will be kept on a shelf out of their (my readers) reach". A large fraction of America wasn't in the right frame of mind - this book was banned in countless schools and countries, and people got fired for getting their pupils to read this book. This book was meaningful because its kind had never been seen before. Holden was the greatest anti-hero since Huckleberry Finn, and the twaddle is not twaddle, it's postmodern, where twaddle is only twaddle if it is. Get that? It's an important book because it came out during the Cold War, conformity and the start of the 1950s. It was the end of WWII, of course it caused a scandal! the point is to identify - the themes of teenage angst and alienation had yet to be explored. Try reading this book as if you has never come across its kind before.

If there was an 'unlike' I'd check it. I didn't identify with Holden as a person, but appreciate him as a character. I guess we all look for different things in a book and perhaps the mood we are in when we read also influences how we feel about a book. :-)

You're not meant to want to be Holden Caulfield. This is yet another review that misses the point. Did you miss the part where he ends up in a mental institution at the end? It is made clear that as a narrator he is highly unreliable because he is in the middle of a nervous breakdown. He is presented as a scared teenager who doesn't know where his life is headed and doesn't want to let go of childhood. Some people identify with that and that's fine. But the book does not endorse the view that you are healthy for identifying with Holden because Holden has mental issues, for god's sakes.

A one-star rating is just too much. This novel deserves more credit.

I didn't relate to him at all, but I still enjoyed the novel. I wanted to smack him, but he is a typical teenaged boy, I think. I did like his little monologue about spray-painting "Fuck You" on walls and such. That's one of the only things Holden was right about.
But still, I loved the novel. I think being annoyed by the anti-hero was precisely the point.

Good review!

Wendy wrote: "I didn't relate to him at all, but I still enjoyed the novel. I wanted to smack him, but he is a typical teenaged boy, I think. I did like his little monologue about spray-painting "Fuck You" on wa..."

Holden's pain is real. You have to realize he said the things he did because of how messed up the world really was. People don't like this book because they think it lacks a plot, but a novel doesn't need a plot to be great.

Well said mate (Richard), i dont think people dont like the book because it lacks a plot, because it is not as refreshing as it was 50 years ago, its kind of phony you know.

I love the book and I completely realte to holden, but I still like this review in a way : )

I agree with you, Richard. You either love Holden or you hate him. I just happened to fall in the latter category.

You're supposed to hate Holden and relate to him at the same time. That's kind of the point.