The Catcher in the Rye
discussion
The Most Overrated Books
Igor wrote: "Val wrote: "Brooklyn wrote: "I think the books that schools force upon high schoolers really need to be updated and rethought.."I couldn't agree more. School programs are full of depressing books..."
What are they reading now?
I would not say that Hardy, Dickens, Shakespeare were fun exactly. The characters might be unhappy, in danger, suffering; but I found those writers' novels brilliant and unforgettable (even though I did not totally comprehend them), and I went on to read more of them. I think getting used to reading difficult material in 'dated' English makes for reading comprehension more agile and readers who are more appreciative of literature (whether 'classic,' contemporary, translated) no matter what the reader's age. There's something to be said for stretching one's intellect.
It would have been awesome to have read LoTR for requiredreading! The first book on 9th or 10th grade and so on.
Like Kallie says, there's *a lot* to be said for stretching one's intellect.And "depressing"? What, we shouldn't teach Of Mice and Men, Great Gatsby, Lord of the Flies, Native Son, Hamlet or Tale of Two Cities to our kids?
You want happily ever after? Fun? Sunshine and good vibrations? Seriously? So, in addition to our schools fucking kids over as far as not teaching them how to read and think, you want these schools to give them some rainbows and butterflies view of the world so they aren't emotionally equipped to function in society, either?
I certainly don't think we need to avoid classics, old literature, depressing literature. My only thoughts were that many of these lists of books high schoolers should read have not been updated for 50 years! For example The Old Man & The Sea, The Red Pony, A Tale of Two Cities are some of the lesser works of great writers picked because they are easier or simpler. Why not A Farewell to Arms, Grapes of Wrath, or Great Expectations?
Petergiaquinta wrote: "Like Kallie says, there's *a lot* to be said for stretching one's intellect.And "depressing"? What, we shouldn't teach Of Mice and Men, Great Gatsby, Lord of the Flies, Native Son, Hamlet or Tale..."
Or maybe something in the middle in between rainbows and total depression? Those books can be taught, but not in high school and not to the general population. If anything, they cause aversion to reading, in the best case. They are also misunderstood by the audience, which is even worse.
Igor
@BrooklynThose are some great books, too, and they're also taught in schools. For my money, though, A Farewell to Arms isn't going to appeal to very many high schoolers today, and has little to offer them. I'd recommend The Things They Carried as a more approachable (and frankly far better) "war" novel for high schoolers to read today. I just saw Tim O'Brien speak, and he's got a lot say in that book to our students about the wars we fight and their impact on our soldiers.
@IgorThe “general” population is who most needs those books...and if not in high school, then when pray tell will they encounter them later on down the road? Get real...we aren’t exactly a nation of readers.
We need a general population who can understand the complexities of language and of life itself. Right now we (talking about America here) have a tremendous chunk of our population who can’t read or think or empathize or self reflect or even puzzle out some of the simplest notions staring them in the face.
Reading good literature, complex literature, and yes “depressing” literature is what gets folks to start thinking about the world they live in, not being spoonfed some facile, sunny make-believe version of the world.
I don’t even know what these “happy” texts are you think we should be having our kids read...
Well, the current state is a nation of non-readers - educated in a system that uses classics as a significant part of the curriculum. Perhaps that's reasonable evidence to try a different way? Perhaps the low state of readership stems from inadequate materials and methods?People will not magically start thinking about the world - unless they have in them - and that will be a tiny, tiny minority of people.
Alas, this is the Dunning-Kruger effect ... in effect. Smart people assume that others are just as capable as they are.
If people have limited enthusiasm or desire or even ability to learn, giving them heavy classics will 100% alienate them. But if they read something lighter, there's a non-zero chance they might actually like it and slowly distance themselves from the current state of ignorance.
You don't self-reflect with Tolstoy. You do it because you have the ability to do that - and then, as an extension of self, you may read books that will give you an extra dose of enlightenment. Not the other away around.
So people who have the inclination and desire should read the classics, if they choose so. But those without it will only get an even greater aversion to "intellectual" stuff.
You cannot turn nations around, but you can win over individuals. I believe LoTR has a greater chance of producing a future reader than Nabukov, Pasternak, Hugo or Hemmingway when you're 16.
Igor
Complexity of text teaches complexity of thought, especially when a student is working through the text with a good teacher.Exposure to the wide-ranging experiences of complex, well-developed characters teaches empathy and understanding.
And yes, these texts do give us the ability to self reflect because they raise significant, thought-provoking ideas in the minds of the reader. Teenagers are capable of this. But if all you feed them are minor texts with weak characters, none of this will happen. This is why YA is such thin gruel thar doesn’t belong in the classroom...bad writing, cliched characters, simplistic storylines. Teens need something with more substance.
I’m still curious what you think schools should be teaching. Trust me, Lord of the Rings would be a turn off to most teens today. For starters, it’s more difficult than most of what they already read for class. Tolkien is a scholar; his writing is challenging. There are a lot of names and details in LoTR. Today’s kids really aren’t that interested. And today’s teens aren’t big fans of fantasy on the whole. They aren’t into Game of Thrones. They could care less about Harry Potter.
One could make a lot of the same arguments made about classic lit with biology texts, history text, etc. And then we get to math...I didn't care for some of the classics. Cooper and Fitzgerald left me cold. Didn't stop me from reading Ian Fleming. And school officials had no problem with me reading my entertainment in study hall, lunch, etc. Some of the classics I liked. Edgar Allen Poe anyone?
I have a memory of my father in veterans hospital. He read westerns. He never got past the 10th grade. I gave him "Grapes of Wrath" and he loved it. Someone had to give it to me first.
Bill (Just a) wrote: "One could make a lot of the same arguments made about classic lit with biology texts, history text, etc. And then we get to math..."Hear, hear.
School reading curriculum should contain the occasional fun and/or light reading, but the argument that the books that are on there that have been criticized in this thread is BS. Personal taste aside, if a love of reading isn't inculcated by parents and family and one's own inclination then there's very little likelihood that a school curriculum is going to overcome that. There's a very good chance that the only possible exposure to the ideas and culture represented by books like Gatsby and Catcher will happen in a school environment for many people. Eliminating that and replacing it with books meant to get kids reading after the last set of books failed to get kids reading and the previous set of books failed to get kids reading is to mistake the role of education for babysitting. Why not give them video games instead of physical education and teach texting rather than essays? Instead of Civics and History just sit the kiddies down in front of a reality show and Fox and Friends....
Petergiaquinta wrote: "@BrooklynThose are some great books, too, and they're also taught in schools. For my money, though, A Farewell to Arms isn't going to appeal to very many high schoolers today, and has little to o..."
Sounds good!
the catcher in the rye is not for everybody. Its more like a indie art film that is for someone with particular taste. I thoroughly enjoyed it though.
Petergiaquinta wrote: "Complexity of text teaches complexity of thought, especially when a student is working through the text with a good teacher.Exposure to the wide-ranging experiences of complex, well-developed cha..."
Petergiaquinta wrote: "@Igor
The “general” population is who most needs those books...and if not in high school, then when pray tell will they encounter them later on down the road? Get real...we aren’t exactly a nation..."
Yes. We do need that in our population. How else will democracy (government by the people, to a better extent) be possible?
School curriculum reading would possibly be better greeted by students, if a selection of quality material of different eras was presented. The classics are important. I remember my introduction to DH Lawrence was Sons and Lovers. I found it honest, open and passionate. He gave me words for feelings that my immaturity left wanting. I’ve read it so many times now and still feel the honest passion.
We need to teach and remember that these writers of the bygone eras, had no access to computers, smartphones, tape recorders etc. Many hand wrote their books and some were lucky to access a clunky typewriter. Imagine the feat it was to produce War and Peace or Anna Karenina ( Tolstoy), Les Miserables ( V Hugo) , Lord of the Rings ( Tolkien). Dickens, Shakespeare, Hardy etc etc . Even if I don’t connect with the book , I admire the literacy, tenacity and brilliance required to produce such masterpieces.
Through the years, many wonderful authors have fortunately shared their talent with us.
Helene Hanff 84 Charing Cross Rd. Joseph Heller Catch 22, John Fowels French Lieutenants Woman. Books by Cormac McCarthy, Margaret Atwood etc etc
So many wonderful authors right through to today, writing great books that would enhance the school curriculum in many ways.
So many that education boards and selectors could choose from.
Personal taste and life experiences are always going to play a factor in a persons reading pleasure. JK Rowling’s excellent Harry Potter series inspired many children and adults to read. However, I have met both children and adults who did not enjoy them. Even though I think they are missing out, that’s my opinion not theirs .
Due to inability to edit after posting , unable to remove the word not from my post. Sorry .
Moby Dick is one of the best novels I have ever read. It does not belong on this list.Here's a quick sampling from various internet sites that recommend skipping these:
The Catcher in the Rye
Moby Dick
The Great Gatsby
Waiting for Godot
The ..."
As for the Da Vinci Code, it will be forgotten 20 years from now...20 years is generous.
Timothy wrote: "Eric wrote: "Moby Dick is one of the best novels I have ever read. It does not belong on this list.Here's a quick sampling from various internet sites that recommend skipping these:
The Catcher i..."
Not really. The thread is about quality, not opinion. Some books are objectively of better quality than others. What distinguishes them? Style, characterization that brings life to the page rather than stereotype, the ability to evoke a world -- many qualities that are difficult but not impossible to describe.
Eric wrote: "Here's a quick sampling from various internet sites that recommend skipping these:The Catcher in the Rye
Moby Dick
The Great Gatsby
Waiting for Godot"
My main argument against Moby Dick is on volume. At around 200k words, one could read The Catcher in the Rye (±73k), The Great Gatsby (±47k), Waiting for Godot (±22k), throw in Fahrenheit 451 (±46k), and maybe a Shakespeare play. There are elements of MD that have a lot of value to the literary canon, but I would suggest that word count kills it off a lot faster than Ahab could have killed the whale.
I make the same argument, BTW, about War and Peace and Remembrance of Things Past/In Search of Lost Time, though for some reason I never quite get the same push back as I do for MD. I do think it's a good idea for readers to take on something of that length from time to time (if they have the time...) and I think there's an argument to be made that MD has a good bang for the buck compared to some similar length works. One might be better off reading Melville's book than Crime and Punishment, for instance, especially at a certain age. Opinions can vary. The thing about MD, however, is that one really can read an abridged version at about half the length and get all the core themes of the novel; man versus nature, obsession, revenge, hubris, the early American-Americanishness of it all, etc. I'm not sure the same could be said about Dostoyevsky. Moby Dick is my Moby Dick....
Gary wrote: "My main argument against Moby Dick is on volume. At around 200k words, one could read The Catcher in the Rye (±73k), The Great Gatsby (±47k), Waiting for Godot (±22k), throw in Fahrenheit 451 (±46k), and maybe a Shakespeare play. There are elements of MD that have a lot of value to the literary canon, but I would suggest that word count kills it off a lot faster than Ahab could have killed the whale. "I'm fond of Moby Dick, but agree that it could have used considerable editing. Still, I'd much rather reread Dostoevsky's The Idiot, Brothers Karamazov, or Crime and Punishment.
PBS did a survey to find the 100 favorite books. Statistical Sampling was employed to derive a list. Massaged and categorized. And then 2M people voted. Seems appropriate for this discussion. Some of the results.#15 - The Great Gatsby
#20 - Atlas Shrugged
#30 - The Catcher in the Rye
#33 - The Da Vinci Code
#46 - Moby Dick
#47 - Catch 22
#50 - War and Peace
#73 - Twilight
#86 - Fifty Shades of Grey
https://www.pbs.org/the-great-america...
Could an overrated book crack the 100. I guess so. That may be a great example of overrated. "Fifty Sades of Grey" - really? "Left Behind" is also on the list.
Just read W. Somerset Maughan’s On Human Bondage and was rather impressed but I’m struggling with Dreiser’s An American Tragedy. Could the latter be an overrated classic or is is just a difficult read?
Bill (Just a) wrote: "PBS did a survey to find the 100 favorite books. Statistical Sampling was employed to derive a list. Massaged and categorized. And then 2M people voted. Seems appropriate for this discussion. Some ...""Nobody ever went broke underestimating the intelligence of the American people," is attributed to H.L. Mencken, although it's unclear whether he actually said or wrote it. Fifty Shades of Grey? Twilight? The Da Vinci Code? Atlas Shrugged? These results prove the validity of that statement.
Bill (Just a) wrote: "PBS did a survey to find the 100 favorite books. Statistical Sampling was employed to derive a list. Massaged and categorized. And then 2M people voted. Seems appropriate for this discussion. Some ..."What??? Twilight? Is that this vampire book?
https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/4...
Holy Cow!
Add the Fifty Shades series.
Michael wrote: "Bill (Just a) wrote: "PBS did a survey to find the 100 favorite books. Statistical Sampling was employed to derive a list. Massaged and categorized. And then 2M people voted. Seems appropriate for ..."Hear! Hear!
I think we need to define what "highly rated" means. I refuse to believe that Twilight of 50 Shades of Gray are highly rated. Are we talking about sales, professional reviews, or just crowd-sourced opinion? Most people can distinguish between something they like, and something with artistic merit, right? Just because something tastes good, doesn't mean it's good for you.
Jeff wrote: "I think we need to define what "highly rated" means. I refuse to believe that Twilight of 50 Shades of Gray are highly rated. Are we talking about sales, professional reviews, or just crowd-sourced..."Agreed. There's got to be at least three ways a book might be "highly rated" or "overrated" and those terms seem to get used interchangeably with "that book was not to my personal taste" or "it was above my reading level" and/or "I was required to read this book in school and I resent it as much as I do being made to climb the rope in P.E. class..." rather frequently.
First, here on GR, and in any number of other sites that do similar sorts of things, there's the 1-5 star system of ratings. Shakespeare's Romeo and Juliet, for instance, has a rating of 3.74 as of this moment here on GR while Dead to the World by Charlaine Harris, the fourth of her Sookie Stackhouse opus, has a rating of 4.14.
Granted, those are of 1.8m+ ratings versus 227k+ ratings, and #4 is the most highly rated of that series... but still: nearly half a star difference between a seminal play that has influences all up and down Western literature (including vampire novels...) and a farcical contemporary Southern bloodsucker romance means that there is clearly something amiss there.
Second would be general popularity, as in units sold. I remember reading that the authors with the most copies of their works in English are
#1: God (the Bible) [Technically, I think this one is an anthology, but we'll leave that alone for our purposes here....]
#2: Shakespeare
#3: Agatha Christie
Now, I like Hercule Poirot as much as the next fella, but it seems like there should be at least a few names between her and The Bard. She must, in that sense, qualify as overrated.
Third, I would suggest is critical/academic literary success. The problem with this one is that in order to determine if someone is highly rated or over-rated then one would have to figure out what the hell critical/academic success means. They may be two different things. I'll just say Infinite Jest by David Foster Wallace and leave it at that.
I would suggest that most user ratings on sites, mine included, like this are based entirely on personal enjoyment. They are not objective critiques taking into account the author's skill, or the piece's impact on literature in general.
For example, A Portrait of the Artist as a Young Man is brilliantly written. It is genius how the narrative structure changes over time with the protagonist's maturity. I think it's a great work of art. However, despite my appreciation of the skill employed to craft such a novel, I found it thoroughly unenjoyable, personally. But I am not a critic, and my ratings do not represent the value of the novel. If you have similar tastes to me, you may find my ratings interesting. But they are certainly not meant as a definitive guide to literature.
For example, A Portrait of the Artist as a Young Man is brilliantly written. It is genius how the narrative structure changes over time with the protagonist's maturity. I think it's a great work of art. However, despite my appreciation of the skill employed to craft such a novel, I found it thoroughly unenjoyable, personally. But I am not a critic, and my ratings do not represent the value of the novel. If you have similar tastes to me, you may find my ratings interesting. But they are certainly not meant as a definitive guide to literature.
Gary wrote: "#1: God (the Bible) [Technically, I think this one is an anthology, but we'll leave that alone for our purposes here....]#2: Shakespeare
#3: Agatha Christie
Now, I like Hercule Poirot as much as the next fella, but it seems like there should be at least a few names between her and The Bard. She must, in that sense, qualify as overrated.
..."
Really well made point. I note the number 1 anthology that you listed was my pick for the most overrated book.
Jeff wrote: "I would suggest that most user ratings on sites, mine included, like this are based entirely on personal enjoyment. They are not objective critiques taking into account the author's skill, or the piece's impact on literature in general."I think you're right. It seems to me, however, that that would indicate a misuse of the term "overrated" on a basic level, or it does point out that such a subjective assessment is partial at best and problematic. It's not like the last 20 generations of people who have read and loved Shakespeare are going to show up on the Internet to compete with the disgruntled high schoolers on their phones scanning through Goodreads for posts to steal for their term papers and who, in passing, give his work a single star because Mrs. Flogbottom gives too much homework, gah!
Bill (Just a) wrote: "Really well made point. I note the number 1 anthology that you listed was my pick for the most overrated book."The Bible is probably over-rated on all three of those rubrics....
Huckleberry FinnTender is the Night
The Ginger Man
The girl on the train. What was even going on?
deleted user wrote: "Which books do you think are overrated? Here's a quick sampling from various internet sites that recommend skipping these:
The Catcher in the Rye
Moby Dick
The Great Gatsby
Waiting for Godot
The ..."
deleted user wrote: "Which books do you think are overrated?
Here's a quick sampling from various internet sites that recommend skipping these:
The Catcher in the Rye
Moby Dick
The Great Gatsby
Waiting for Godot
The ..."
This question and list are like a bad prank.
deleted user wrote: "Which books do you think are overrated? Here's a quick sampling from various internet sites that recommend skipping these:
The Catcher in the Rye
Moby Dick
The Great Gatsby
Waiting for Godot
The ..."
The Alchemist
Marko wrote: "deleted user wrote: "Which books do you think are overrated? Here's a quick sampling from various internet sites that recommend skipping these:
The Catcher in the Rye
Moby Dick
The Great Gatsby
W..."
I agree, Marko. And I prefer to see this as a prank because it's depressing to think of people actually feeling that these books are 'overrated' (kind of like a certain other person often in the news uses this word to put down what he is too lazy or narrow-minded to understand.
It depends on what "overrated" means. The best author in the world can be "overrated", if we assume that the books are more impactful than what they really are.
Howard wrote: "It depends on what "overrated" means. The best author in the world can be "overrated", if we assume that the books are more impactful than what they really are."As it was used in the OP, I don't think it's a meaningful term, nor do I think it accurately describes even what that post meant. It read to me like that person was really saying, "People read these books, but I personally didn't enjoy them." It was used without much (if any) real thought as to nomenclature, and just had a pejorative, emotive vibe. Apologies for the self-promotion, but I'm going to refer you to my post #5806 above.
Just finished Oliver Twist and was shocked at the anti-semitism and misogyny. I know it’s a classic and that we shouldn’t judge by today’s standards, but I was still taken aback. If Confederate Civil War Monuments are considered taboo by today’s Social justice warriors, Dickens is doomed.
Possibly...but that's a bit of a false equivalence.The thing that will ultimately doom Dickens will be the inability of the general public to be able to read anything beyond 140 characters at a time or think in abstractions.
Petergiaquinta wrote: "Possibly...but that's a bit of a false equivalence.The thing that will ultimately doom Dickens will be the inability of the general public to be able to read anything beyond 140 characters at a t..."
As an adjunct instructor, I find this inability likely to spread. I get a lot of disbelief verging on outrage from Freshmen assigned readings in contemporary English, let alone Dickens or Shakespeare, etc. The concept of stretching your abililities, being challenged by reading . . . Few of them understand the value of struggling to understand, re-reading, having faith that pushing your limits has rewards.
Petergiaquinta wrote: "Possibly...but that's a bit of a false equivalence.The thing that will ultimately doom Dickens will be the inability of the general public to be able to read anything beyond 140 characters at a t..."
Petergiaquinta wrote: "Possibly...but that's a bit of a false equivalence.
The thing that will ultimately doom Dickens will be the inability of the general public to be able to read anything beyond 140 characters at a t..."
S.W. wrote: "Just finished Oliver Twist and was shocked at the anti-semitism and misogyny. I know it’s a classic and that we shouldn’t judge by today’s standards, but I was still taken aback. If Confederate Civ..."
Interestingly, your sentence making reference to 140 characters is about 140 characters long. I think there is some wisdom in what you write. Many old works have frustratingly convoluted sentences ... sentences that defy the advice given to students.
There is much overrated material out there and Catcher in the Rye is certainly an example, as are the following titles: Never Let Me Go, Unbearable Lightness of Being, Crime and Punishment, The Idiot, The Little Prince, A Hundred Years of Solitude, Fahrenheit 451 and The Alchemist. Charlatanism knows no bounds. Sport remains the only domain where there is no place for charlatanism.
Dave wrote: "Petergiaquinta wrote: "Possibly...but that's a bit of a false equivalence.The thing that will ultimately doom Dickens will be the inability of the general public to be able to read anything beyon..."
Yes, we should just throw out all that old stuff difficult for today's students to read. All sentences should read by their standards, or the standards they are taught these days, or those of ANYONE bored with classics or difficult foreign contexts (like those brought to us by Dostoevsky, for example, who was surely a charlatan).
Dave wrote: "Sport remains the only domain where there is no place for charlatanism."Needs < irony > tags.
all discussions on this book
|
post a new topic
High Fidelity (other topics)
Less Than Zero (other topics)
Adam Bede (other topics)
The Scarlet Letter (other topics)
More...
George R.R. Martin (other topics)
Allan Bloom (other topics)
Richard Dawkins (other topics)
Richard Dawkins (other topics)
More...
Books mentioned in this topic
War and Peace (other topics)High Fidelity (other topics)
Less Than Zero (other topics)
Adam Bede (other topics)
The Scarlet Letter (other topics)
More...
Authors mentioned in this topic
Leo Tolstoy (other topics)George R.R. Martin (other topics)
Allan Bloom (other topics)
Richard Dawkins (other topics)
Richard Dawkins (other topics)
More...
I couldn't agree more. School programs are full of depressing books which I thi..."
110% agree - The whole curriculum is horrible. If they gave children fun books (LoTR, Harry Potter, whatever), they might actually read more. Instead, they get truly depressing stuff mostly from the post-modern era that kids can't even begin to fully comprehend.
Igor