Catch 22- The discussion

[Kat]

Ann wrote: "Laurin and Jasmine,
MASH was actually based on a book too, although I haven't read it: Mash: A Novel About Three Army Doctors by a surgeon writing under the name of Richard Hooker."

I'm thinking all wars qualify on the absurdity/horror front, or at least all modern ones.

[Jasmine]

Thanks Ann - I just put it on my To Read shelf

[Ann D]

Jasmine,
I remember liking the movie MASH very much. I also liked the TV show, but that showed a gentler world than the one in the movie.

The movie Catch-22 had a great all star list. I saw it, but too long ago to remember it. Some criticized it, saying the verbal virtuosity of the book didn't translate well to the more realistic movie format.

[Jasmine]

I read this quote yesterday - it was in a letter written by William Styron to his father about why the subject of war is so hard to write about. [Both Styron and Heller served in the Second World War] I think his thoughts help illuminate why Joseph Heller has done something extraordinary in this book, and why so many have been deeply moved by it:

"Now the crux of the situation lies in the fact that, to the writer, war is a gigantic, inexorable, relentlessly terrible panorama which, although at every hand fraught with mists of beauty and pathos, swirls about him so swiftly and chaotically that he is unable to find a tongue to utter his thoughts. And after the war, if he has extricated himself from the whole mess with a sound mind and body, he is usually so terribly cynical and embittered that those golden words turn to dust. To be platitudinous, it changes one’s viewpoint immensely. Like Wolfe’s Eugene Gant I see ‘Time, dark time, flowing by me like a river’ – and that is all one can say."

[Kat]

Jasmine, thanks for sharing that great quote.

[Elizabeth]

I keep thinking of my grandfather during this book. He and his two brothers fought in WWI, one in each of the 3 theaters of war (N. Europe, Middle East, S. Europe). Where I see some parallels is my grandfather's attitude towards authority - those in power. He knew first hand how power corrupts. I see that in how the cornal keeps raising the flights and the changes when General P comes to visit the squadron.

I just finished chapter 32 on Mrs. Daneeka (not posting spoilers, so if you're not there yet you might not know what I'm talking about). I'm still trying to analyze it and figure out if Heller incorporated it. Was it for more than just the added confusion of war and bureaucracy of the military?

[Ann D]

I'm guessing that the more action you see and the more that watch your buddies die, the more angry and disillusioned you become - especially when you see how the people above you have botched it.

My Dad was in WWII, but he only got there towards then end, when he participated in the Battle of the Bulge. His unit helped liberate Dachau. He didn't talk about it much, but some of the fellows who served under him (he was a captain) kept in contact with him for the rest of his life.

When he was dying, he told me that he had never killed anyone during the war, and he seemed profoundly grateful for that. He was a doctor, so he was dedicated to keeping people alive. However, I know that if you are in combat for very long, you have to kill. It all has to leave a big mark on you.

With Vietnam and the Iraq Wars, we have become so much more aware of the cost of war on people's psyches. I don't think it was very acceptable to talk openly about it right after WWII.

[Ann D]

Elizabeth,
Interesting comments on the Mrs. Daneeka chapter. Her husband Doc Daneeka was clearly alive, but everyone ignored him because the papers showed that he had been aboard a plane that went down.

When Mrs. Daneeka heard that her husband was dead, "The poor woman was totally distraught for almost a whole week." However, she managed to adjust very quickly once she started getting all the lucrative death benefits, to the extent that she ignored his final plea and moved with no forwarding address.

I suppose that Heller included this because it was another example of insane bureaucracy. We have gotten so caught up in procedures and forms that we forget about reality. I can relate to this.

It reminded me of the dead man's things in Yossarian's tent. No one would do anything about them because the man had died before he had officially checked in with his unit.

On another level, I thought Heller enjoyed "punishing" Dr. Daneeka." At least I enjoyed watching him suffer. Daneeka was in charge of enforcing Catch-22 and he spent most of his time avoiding all work and lamenting how much he had suffered financially because of the war. Also, the fact that everyone, including his wife, abandoned him was ironic since he caused the "death" problem himself by fudging his required flight hours. This air force doctor was afraid of flying. :)

Do any other of the "bad" characters get their just deserts? I am having trouble thinking of any who do.

I am glad you are still with us Elizabeth. You are nearing the end. What do you thinks so far?

[Elizabeth]

Thank you for understanding my coming-going. My life is hard and insane, books are my escape, when I can get to them...and like this one add perspective.

I'm finding different things than I did 30 years ago when I read it. Probably because this time it is for fun and not a required reading for English Lit. - LOL! I absolutely love the writing style. I know some don't care for it, but I like how the pieces are disjointed, like our memories come out. We remember bits and pieces here and there, then something happens that brings back another piece or makes us remember something else from another time.

The bureaucracy of the paperwork in the chapter is fun. I like your idea that Dr. Daneeka was being "punished". I think the neat thing about all the characters is they are so flawed and confused. They all are wrapped up in only themselves...none of them think about others. Self survival maybe?

[Gina]

My dad was a mechanic in World War II. All my life, he was in awe of the skill and courage shown by all the young pilots and air crews. He would talk about how they would come back in to base skidding on the plane belly or with one wheel down and one up, with fire engines racing down the runway with the planes. I wish I had had the chance to discuss this book with him. He was very patriotic, but he did discuss crazy situations. He formed a group with his buddies and they met every week or so until most all of them died..

[Ann D]

Elizabeth,
The good thing about the discussions here is that there is a starting date, but no ending date. Feel free to post later, whenever time permits.

I liked your observation that self-survival made everyone so wrapped up in themselves. The negative characters carry it to ridiculous extremes. Yosarian's first and foremost objective is to stay alive, but he, at least, has friends in the flight crews that he cares about. They are, after all, in the same predicament.

I can recall only one positive character in a position of authority - Dr. Stubbs. In contrast to Daneeka, he wants to ground all the flyers with health complaints. Can anyone else remember others?

[Ann D]

Gina,
How lucky your Dad was to have buddies nearby to meet with so regularly!

I liked your Dad's first hand report of the flying crews during the war. Their job was so dangerous; the stress must have been incredible.

[Robert]

I read the MASH books -- surprisingly, they're quite conservative compared to the liberal world of the movie and tv adaptations.

As for Catch-22, what struck me (as it so often has with Heller's work) is how it starts off being hysterically funny and ends up being tragically sad. He pulls us in with the laughter and keeps us in our seats so we can take the depressing truths.

[Ann D]

Good point, Robert. The humor in CATCH-22 always always has a sardonic edge, but I smiled throughout and sometimes laughed out loud.

As the book progressed and all of Yossarian's buddies died (in battle, from a cat, or being "disappeared") the underlying sadness comes to the fore. And yet, the ending made me hopeful. Was that a cop out?

[Barbara]

I finished this tonight and am giving it 5 stars. It is truly a timeless book, especially given our experiences in Viet Nam, Iraq and Afghanistan. I kept thinking of all the extended tours of duty. Milo turned into a symbol of multinational corporations and military contractors that have no allegiance to anyone. I'd like to think that it would go out of date someday, but I'm afraid it won't. And, Heller did it all with the humor and flashes of insight that allowed me to keep on reading. It's truly a brilliant book. Ann, thanks for nominating it. I don't think I would have read it without that push.

[Kat]

You are so right, Barbara--it's still heart-breakingly relevant.

[Ann D]

I'm glad you liked it, Barb. It wasn't like I remembered it, but I think I had a different perspective reading it again after so many years. When I was young, I interpreted it as a critique of the Vietnam War -even though I have now learned that it was published in 1961 before we had regular combat troops involved in that quagmire. As a baby boomer member of that 1960's generation, I truly believed that we would make everything better and not repeat the "mistakes" of our parent's generation. As you and Kat pointed out, the wars just continued and not much changed. It's still relevant.

This time around, I paid more attention to the critique of big business. At first Milo just seemed a little crazy, but as the story went on and it became clear that he would sacrifice his own buddies for a buck, the reader sees just how immoral and dangerous this representative of huge conglomerates is.

What did you think of the ending, Barb?

[Gina]

Sometimes, I didn't know whether to laugh or cry, and sometimes I was very angry (mostly at Milo).

[Ann D]

I felt that way about Milo too, Gina.

[Allen]

Here is a Catch-22-relevant excerpt from the interview with Heller that appeared in the June 1975 issue of Playboy:

PLAYBOY: Aside from Yossarian, some of the other characters in Catch-22 have become cult figures in their own right. Are any of them based on people you knew?

HELLER: Just Hungry Joe. His real name is Joe Chrenko and he's now an insurance agent in New Jersey.

P: Hungry Joe is the one who has screaming nightmares in his tent. Did Chrenko also run around Rome claiming to be a Life photographer so he could take pictures of naked girls?

H: Only once.

P: Did he complain about the way you portray him in the book?

H: His only complaint was that I didn't use his last name. He feels it would have helped his insurance business.

P: How about the rest of the characters?

H: They're not based on anyone I knew in the war. They're products of an imagination that drew on American life in the postwar period. The Cold War, really. I deliberately seeded the book with anachronisms like loyalty oaths, helicopters, IBM machines and agricultural subsidies to create the feeling of American life from the McCarthy period on. So when Milo Minderbinder says, "What's good for Milo Minderbinder is good for the country," he's paraphrasing Charles E. Wilson, the former head of General Motors, who told a Senate committee, "What is good for the country is good for General Motors, and vice versa."
But I resisted the temptation to make Milo a bloated plutocrat stereotype. And I moved away from the other kind of stereotype -- William Holden or Tony Curtis as the con man who gets things done. Instead, I gave him a mental and moral simplicity that, to my mind, makes him a horrifyingly dangerous person because he lacks evil intent. Milo uses the credo of the National Association of Manufacturers and the chamber of commerce -- but I gave him a sincerity those organizations don't have.

P: How about Major Major, the timid officer whom nobody can get in to see unless he's officially out?

H: He's drawn from the McCarthy period as well. An Army dentist, Captain Peress, had been promoted to major, even though he refused to sign loyalty oaths. Toward the end of the Army-McCarthy hearings, when he had little else to do, Joe McCarthy kept asking who had promoted Major Peress. I took a paragraph straight out of the news reports and slipped it into the chapter about Major Major, who was promoted by an IBM machine. When he becomes suspect because he studied English history -- wasn't American history good enough for him? -- people start running around Washington asking, "Who promoted Major Major?"

P: And ex-Pfc. Wintergreen, the enlisted man who really runs the Army?

H: Wintergreen came out of both my military and corporate experience. In a large corporation, the way to get ahead is often to get in with the mail clerks and secretaries of important people. Careers can be made or broken simply by tearing up certain memos, and in the Army, although I was an officer, the only people I was afraid of were the enlisted men in the orderly room. They could process or not process my requests, take me on or off combat duty. In my dramatization of Catch-22, there's a line that doesn't appear in the book. Wintergreen says, "I was going to cancel the Normandy invasion, until Eisenhower committed more armor."

P: Getting back to Yossarian, are any other of his experiences like yours?

H: His encounter with Luciana, the Roman whore, corresponds exactly with an experience I had. He sleeps with her, she refuses money and suggests that he keep her address on a slip of paper. When he agrees, she sneers, "Why? So you can tear it up?" He says of course he won't and tears it up the minute she's gone -- then regrets it bitterly. That's just what happened to me in Rome. Luciana was Yossarian's vision of a perfect relationship. That's why he saw her only once, and perhaps that's why I saw her only once. If he examined perfection too closely, imperfections would show up.

[Barbara]

Interesting, Allen! Thanks so much for posting this interview.

The women in this book seem very much a product of 50's attitudes. And, except for the nurses, they seemed to be almost all prostitutes. I wonder if that was part of Heller's experience of war as well, given his story about Luciana.

Ann, I really liked the ending. What I liked the most was that Orr made it to Sweden and, in Yossarian's mind at least, he'd been plotting it all along. And, it didn't matter to me if it was possible or not because the whole book was a bit surreal. I just liked the fantasy of them triumphing over the whole bureaucratic mess.

[Kat]

Allen, thank you so much for posting the interview excerpt--fascinating, esp. what he said about Milo--I've just been reading about Milo (I'm only to about p. 100 in my rereading, since I started so late and had 2 other books going already)and was struck by that sincerity that Heller mentions.

Barbara, I was mulling over the women today, too. They're definitely objects rather than subjects--none of them have the kind of characterization that most of the male characters get--and yet they don't trigger my usual feminist frustration. It was so much a book about the (male) soldier experience, from the soldier perspective--not the individual experience, but the collectivized experience, of which this objectification was so much a part, that it would have jarred, I think, for it to be any other way.

And Clevinger--I am much in sympathy with that fellow, whose unappealing character is not unlike my youthful self!

[Ann D]

Great interview, Allen. Thanks so much for your contribution. It's so nice to have you here.

It's helpful to know that Heller wrote the book in the context of the 50's and the Cold War, rather than World War II.

Barb, I liked the ending too, and as you said, he had certainly set it up with the long drawn-out description of Orr's behavior and exploits. Just about all the other fighting men died, so I appreciated the possibility that Yossarian actually got away with something. (Assuming he could outpace Nately's whore.)

[Ann D]

Kat,
I also liked what Heller said about not giving Milo "evil intent," and how that made him so much more horrifying.

I tend to agree with you about the women. It was basically a man's war. Things would be different today. In this book, most of the women were whores, with a couple of nurses thrown in - although come to think of it those nurses didn't come off very well.

I can relate to the overly sincere Clevinger too. :) One of my favorite characters was Dunbar, who liked being as bored as possible because it made time go slower and he felt like it stretched out his life.

By the way, this novel was originally called CATCH 22 but a book named MILA 18 was coming out about the same time, so they had to change the name.

[Robert]

Great interview!

[Allen]

This is most of the rest of what Heller had to say about Catch-22 in the interview; it ends where the section I posted above begins:

PLAYBOY: How much of Catch-22 is based on your own wartime experiences?

HELLER: Well, like Yossarian, I volunteered for the Army Air Corps and became a bombardier. But I didn't try to avoid being sent overseas, as he did. I actually hoped I would get into combat. I was just 19 and there were a great many movies being made about the war; it all seemed so dramatic and heroic. I remember my mother weeping as the trolley car pulled away with me on it. I couldn't figure out why she was so unhappy. I felt like I was going to Hollywood.

P: So you viewed World War Two as a kind of glorious crusade?

H: No, but I saw it as a war of necessity. Everybody did. Young people today don't know what it's like to fight in a war that makes sense to anybody. And neither did the people in my parents' generation. World War One and the earlier wars in Europe were as nonsensical as Vietnam. But Pearl Harbor united this country in a strong and wholesome and healthy way.

P: About his war experiences, Yossarian complains that people he's never met keep shooting at him every time he flies into the air to drop bombs on them. We gather that you didn't feel persecuted.

H: At first I was sorry when nobody shot at us. I wanted to see a sky full of flak and dogfights and billowing parachutes. War was like a movie to me until, on my 37th mission, we bombed Avignon and a guy in my plane was wounded. I suddenly realized, "Good God, they're trying to kill me, too!" War wasn't much fun after that.

P: That sounds like the Avignon mission in Catch-22, when Snowden, the gunner, is killed.

H: It is, and it's described pretty accurately in the book. Our copilot went berserk at the controls and threw us into a dive. Then one of our gunners was hit by flak and the pilot kept yelling into the intercom, "Help him. Help the bombardier." And I was yelling back, "I'm the bombardier. I'm OK." The gunner's leg was blown open and I took care of him. After Avignon, all I wanted was to go home.

P: Was it because, like Yossarian, you began to suspect you were being sent on missions only to make your superior officers look good?

H: No, it was because I began to suspect I didn't want to die. But I was a good soldier and did what I was told.

P: Did doing what you were told entail anything about which you're particularly sorry now?

H: No, but there was one low-level bombing-and-strafing mission I didn't happen to go on. They couldn't find any military targets, so they shot up everything that moved: women, children, animals. The men were in good spirits after that mission.

P: If you'd gone on that mission, would you have machine-gunned women, children and animals?

H: I might have. There's something sexual about being in a big plane, with a big gun, with big bombs to drop.
-------------------------------
And later on in the interview there was this:

P: You spent eight years working on a book you thought was going to be called Catch-18, then just before publication, you were told to find another number. Did you take it hard?

H: I was heartbroken. I thought 18 was the only number. It took two weeks to select 22. I don't like to rush into things.
--------------------------------

This is about all Heller had to say specifically about the novel, though there was so much more interesting stuff about writing, politics and so forth that I looked, without success, for an online transcript I could link to. If you want to read the rest of the interview, I'd recommend the same source I used: The Playboy Interview,, edited by G. Barry Golson. There are tons of copies available through Bookfinder.com for just a few dollars. (If you decide to go this route, note that there are two volumes of Playboy interviews in existence -- the one you want for Heller is Vol. 1.)

[Kat]

It's funny how now Catch-18 just sounds WRONG!

[Jasmine]

Thank you Allen. That was really fascinating to read.

[Ann D]

Once again, thanks for some fascinating information, Allen. I was especially interested in Heller's comments about World War II, which I agree was one of the very few "good" wars. It's also interesting to see how he worked some of his own experiences into the novel.

I appreciated this line: "There's something sexual about being in a big plane, with a big gun, with big bombs to drop." I wonder if that exhilarating sense of power helps explain the attraction of semi-automatic weapons in our own day.

[aPriL does feral sometimes]

I read this in the 1970's, but I missed everything except for that Catch 22 concept throughout the book. I'm amazed by my youthful blind stupidity and how experience adds depth of understanding. The book is turning out to be a measure of internal growth and perceptual changes. I think I would not have been able to understand half of the above comments 40 years ago.

[Ann D]

I think I missed out on most of it when I first read it too. I related mostly to the stupidity of the authorities in the book. Now I realize that it was all much more complicated.

[aPriL does feral sometimes]

Ann wrote: "I think I missed out on most of it when I first read it too. I related mostly to the stupidity of the authorities in the book. Now I realize that it was all much more complicated."

Exactly.

[Laurin]

I still haven't finished the audiobook. I'm only on chapter 31.

[Ann D]

Do you like the readers, Laurin? I rarely listen to audio books. I don't spend much time in the car, where they would be ideal, and when I do listen I often get distracted. Then it's too hard to back up.

That's just me. I know that a lot of people here are really audio fans and enjoy many books that way.

[Laurin]

I listen to it on my way home from school and when I shower at night. I like the narrator, he does a great job of distinguishing each character by voice. I just think I picked too complex of a book.

[aPriL does feral sometimes]

The ultimate Catch 22 - we are born dying....

[[deleted user]]

Thanks for the link to this discussion, I hope there are still fellow readers around! I am just about halfway through my re-read of Catch-22 so do not have the full picture yet. I first read it about five or six years ago so whereas I remember the major events and characters, most of the nuance and incidentals have been forgotten.

What has struck me most so far is just how smart it is, how very clever and well written. The prose can be beautiful, but not in an ostentatious way that interferes with your understanding of what's happening. I love how things start to call back to parts already mentioned, like the flash of a deja vu. Of course I know this gets addressed fully later on in the book, but I'm not there yet, at the moment it's just a hint in your mind.

As a Brit reading, one of my favourite genres is the quintessential American novel, so that's probably part of the reason I love it so much. But other than that, so far it doesn't strike me as being so obviously about Americans. To me it's subject matter is the war rather than the patriotism attached, nationality doesn't seem an issue really. There are not that many specific references to the enemy or what is being fought for, just the things they are being commanded to do. Also, the sardonic wit running through the narrative feels almost British in itself. I am reminded of a British historical comedy, Blackadder Goes Forth, about the First World War. The portrayal of the Generals as braying, competitive idiots who don't operate in the real world is very similar to Catch-22. They just give orders and have no concept of how ridiculous things are getting. This is a very common theme when applied to Generals of the First World War in literature, so in Catch-22 the stupidity of the superiors involved this time in a more 'worthy' war makes the viewpoint seem even more cynical.

I think this adds to the tragic atmosphere of the whole novel, because one of my enduring memories of reading it the first time was that it was very, very funny but also very, very sad. I will have to wait and see if that still applies!

[Rebecca]

I haven't read it for a year, but I still remember it pretty well, it is one of my favorite books. I also agree that the writing style and humor does remind me of British authors that I have read.

[Ann D]

What an interesting note! Thanks for sharing your perspective. I guess I shouldn't be surprised that Brits like American novels since I read so many British novels and watch British TV shows on public TV or Netflix. I also appreciate sardonic wit, which helps explain my fondness for British writing.

Depending on the book, I do sometimes have trouble with English slang. Thanks to the Oxford dictionary on my Kindle and the internet, I can usually figure it out. Recently some of us read Beyond Black by Hilary Mantel and that one sent me scrambling for the dictionary. I didn't have any trouble with her Wolf Hall. It all depends on the class and region the author is trying to convey. Do you have any similar problems with the dialog in CATCH -22?

I do agree that CATCH-22 has universal themes. It is anti-war and anti-bureaucracy. It sure isn't primarily about World War II, one of the few "necessary" wars. I have never heard of the Blackadder series, but I read about it on Wikipedia. World War I was such a travesty that there would be plenty to satirize.

There is a sense of almost manic insanity throughout CATCH-22 because of the irrationality of these men's lives. However, you are right. There are also very poignant parts.

I hope you continue to post during your reread. You have definitely found the right home on Constant Reader. Welcome!

[Gina]

Soph wrote: "Thanks for the link to this discussion, I hope there are still fellow readers around! I am just about halfway through my re-read of Catch-22 so do not have the full picture yet. I first read it abo..."

I'm so glad you've joined CR, Soph. I took some time to watch the episode BlackAdder Goes Forth. It's a funny program. I plan to watch all the episodes. Thanks for the update. They're available on Amazon, free if you have prime. I need to read Catch-22 again.

[[deleted user]]

Thanks, I am so glad to be here! I was thinking some more about the Blackadder link whilst reading Catch-22 last night because I remembered in one of the episodes (maybe the last one) Edmund Blackadder pretends to be mad to try and get out of the army, then I think realises that nobody would notice because most people around him are mad. It struck me that this was also a central theme in the novel - the major Catch-22 involves Yossarian being sane but acting mad, and the fact you have to be mad to be there. I never realised this before and I must have watched all of the Blackadders hundreds of times ( they are always on our satellite channels over here). Anyway, I definitely think the writers of the show took elements from the novel, the tone of the program has that same sardonic wit. Definitely watch it if you can, it's a national treasure in the UK! (tip: skip series 1 though)

PS I don't really have any problems with American vernacular because we have so much of your culture over here it must come as second nature! We watch so much TV from the US in my house and I read so much of your fiction I could probably be an honorary American. If you need any help deciphering weird British slang let me know and I will do my best to help!

[Ann D]

Soph,
I finally found Season 4 of Blackadder on Netflix. I don't know if you have Netflix in the UK, but it is a subscription service for DVD's and online movies/television series. I have put Season 4 in my Netflix queue and really look forward to watching it.

Thanks for the offer of help with British slang. I will definitely keep it in mind.

[[deleted user]]

I finally got around to reading the whole of this discussion from the beginning and something really struck me. I was going along, enjoying the message of the novel (anti-war, anti-bureaucracy) and thinking what a good point it was.

Ann, I then read your earlier post about how your father's unit in WW2 liberated Dachau and how brave everyday people were having to be to save others. It made me feel uncomfortable about how cynical the novel was being, cynicism I had previously thought brilliant! I spent a lot of my school years studying this war and so many of the things I learned came back to me about what the Allies were fighting for. When I thought of all the suffering and horror we were trying to defeat it put me off the tone of Catch-22 for a while. It WAS a worthy conflict and it is hard to imagine how the world might be if we had not had WW2.

This affected how I was viewing the novel quite a bit until I saw a further post of an interview with Joseph Heller, where he said he believed WW2 was a 'good war' and the book was more of a response to the Cold War situation and other conflicts. Very relieved!

I think this is why I can see more parallels with WW1, the stupid generals and the pointless bureaucracy. The chapter where 19yr-old Nately argues with the 127yr-old Italian man about how absurd or not it is to die for a country strongly reminded me of the Wilfred Owen poem 'Dulce Et Decorum Est', where the poet lambasts those who support WW1 (but do not know the realities) in powerful terms:

My friend, you would not tell with such high zest
To children ardent for some desperate glory,
The old Lie; Dulce et Decorum est
Pro patria mori.

This translates to 'It is sweet and right to die for your country', which under the viewpoint of Catch-22, is also a lie young naive men like Nately get told.

I started to wonder whether it is only set in WW2 because Heller's direct experience was with that war. What if the island of Pianosa is acting as some kind of microcosm, an almost self-contained place to represent the horror, boredom, incompetence and futility of most wars throughout history, and the repetition in the book reflective of the repetition of mistakes mankind makes over time?

[Ann D]

Soph,
Thanks so much for sharing your thoughts as you continue your reread. They are very interesting.

I fully agree with your comments that the anti-war theme seems to fit World War I more than World War II. Everything I have seen and read about World War I supports how hideous and pointless it was. The "war to end all wars" was a terrible waste.

I also agree that the novel was an attack on war in general, rather than a specific attack on WW II. It was written during the Cold War when many people lived in real fear of World War III breaking out between the U.S. and the Soviet Union. As a child, I remember being afraid that the planes I heard overhead might be from the USSR coming to attack us. Admittedly, I was an unusually fearful child, but others my age have shared similar fears with me. It's not surprising that this book really caught on with my generation during the Vietnam War, which so many opposed.


In a lot of ways I think the book is also an attack on the bureaucratic nature of modern society, with its hypocrisy and many inane rules. This bureaucracy is evident not only in the military and government, but also in civilian organizations.

Do you think the fact that Heller worked in advertising made him more cynical?

[Laurin]

I purchased a copy of Catch from the local library sale. I'm looking forward to reading it this time. I listened to it the first time, which was a mistake. Lots of little details get lost when you're driving, working, etc.

[Ann D]

Laurin,
I think you are right that Catch-22 works better as a regular book than an audio one. I know I had to keep looking back.

[[deleted user]]

Ann, such interesting point about Joseph Heller's job. I do think that Heller's work in advertising probably gave him his cynical voice as a writer. I imagine that thinking up ways to sell things to the public could make a person very sceptical about the merits of human nature. I don't know if you've ever watched Mad Men but in the first episode one of the characters who is a copywriter says something like 'Love is invented by guys like me to sell nylons'. Which pretty much suggests how advertisers view the world! Also, advertising is akin to propaganda, something which is intrinsic to any war effort. It's not too far a stretch to suggest that Heller may have seen the supposed 'glory' of war as shown by the media/politicians/army as nothing more than an extension of his own line of work.

Finished my re-read last week and was surprised to find that the ending affected me just as strongly as before if not more. The chapter where Yossarian is walking around Rome witnessing awful things was very disturbing, and the fact he didn't step in to stop any of them made it even worse. It just emphasised the futility of everything and made it seem like whatever efforts were being made for the greater good, it didn't matter because there is always more horror going on around the corner. I finished that chapter feeling quite depressed!

Most of all, I felt the final chapters were where the structure of the novel really came into its own. I know people have complained that the repetition of events bored them and made little sense but in the Snowden chapter it was extremely effective. In so many previous chapters it had mentioned the death of Snowden in the aeroplane, so it tricked me into thinking when I started reading the chapter 'Yes, yes I've heard all this before, I know what happens'. But the matter of fact layering up of the event in previous parts doesn't really prepare the reader for that chapter. The emotional, in-depth description of Snowden's dying moments hit me like a punch in the gut after so much straightforward treatment of death in other situations. I felt it was Heller saying that rather than just names on a page, as most people see wars from a distance, here was the reality of it. Ordinary human beings who are doing extraordinary things but are just as susceptible to pain, fear and doubt as the rest of us.

Poor Snowden, but what a novel! Thanks for the opportunity to join the discussion late, I had such fun flexing my critical muscles! Hope to join in a few other in-depth discussions in the next few months.

[Carol]

Wow Soph, you almost made me want to reread it. Great comment.

[Ann D]

Soph,
I'm so glad that you took the time to post about the latter part of Catch-22. At that point in the book, it's not fun and games any more.

I agree with you completely about the Snowden subplot. In that case the repetition (or is it pre-talk?) about him also lulled me into thinking that I knew what to expect. As you pointed out, that made the chapter about his death much more poignant, but also more horrifying because in that chapter Heller made me feel that I had witnessed it.

I have never watched Mad Men. People keep telling me that it is so wonderful, but then they add, but "It's really depressing." Sometime I think I need to bite the bullet.

Check out our new reading schedule: http://www.goodreads.com/topic/show/1...
We'd love to have you participate in more discussions.

[[deleted user]]

Thanks Ann, I really wanted to read Mr Penumbra's 24 Hour Book Store for the June discussion but alas, not released in the UK until September! I will definitely try and sort out the classic read for July, I haven't read much Somerset Maugham.

P.S. I would recommend Mad Men highly despite the darker elements. It isn't all doom and gloom and feels very literary at times too!