The Catcher in the Rye
discussion
The Most Overrated Books
Cosmic wrote: "Mark wrote: "The book you recommend looks interesting. Thanks. Other than that, I'm not quite sure I understand ex..."Renee wrote,"A friend of mine is in charge of setting the ELA curriculum for ..."
Have you actually read the books? All the way through?
I disagree mightily.
Kallie wrote: ""Have you read The Book Thief? Even then Harry Potter books? Those are some excellent, deep and important works that our children are reading, not to mention things like The Fault in Our Stars and ..."I find that the people who criticize these books the most are the people who have never actually read them.
You haven't read them, so you make assumptions. Your assumptions show your ignorance of the publishing industry. The publishing industry classifies books as "juvenile fiction" based solely on the ages of the main characters. It has nothing whatsoever to do with quality or reading level. I recommend you actually read some of these books and then form an opinion. To Kill a Mockingbird is classified as juvenile fiction.
I have a degree in English literature. I was the doll of all my English teachers in high school and I have read widely of the classics and contemporary literature. Just because something is new doesn't mean it isn't deep or that it isn't useful in furthering a child's literary education.
Cosmic wrote: "Renee wrote: "and I would say they were anything but "dumbed down." These kids have excellent and sophisticated tastes."Are you kidding me? Why do you need to assign books that kids are picking ..."
I didn't say children guided the curriculum. I said that his students recommended that HE read these books.
A little background on The Book Thief: While a work of fiction, the author drew from the experiences his family members had living in Germany during WWII. The book is a wonderful story of sacrifice, bravery, history, compassion. The writing is not "dumbed down" at all. In fact, I would hold it against any recognized classic.
The snobbery in some of these posts is glaring. Don't get me wrong: Someone mentioned 50 Shades of Grey and as far as I'm concerned, it's a travesty that it every got published. I have my own snobbish tendencies. But I can also recognize the quality of books I don't like as well as see past a publishing classification to a book's true value.
Renee wrote: "The book is a wonderful story of sacrifice, bravery, history, compassion. The writing is not "dumbed down" at all. In fact, I would hold it against any recognized classic. "Just scroll up a bit and take another look at what some of the folks have written in the past couple of days. It's not snobbery at all; it's recognizing the complexities that make a book an enduring work of literature versus a nice little read at your monthly book club.
And read those book club novels up, fer chrissakes. Nobody's telling you not to. But whether a book is a wonderful story about sacrifice, bravery, history, compassion does not in and of itself place that book at the same level of writing that Mark has recently so eloquently discussed in that post of his where he quotes from Faulkner's Nobel acceptance speech.
And yeah, I have read all these books that you mention. Some of them multiple times. Have you, on the other hand, read the one I was talking about? That was The Tin Drum...give it a read. It's exactly what Faulkner is talking about there.
Petergiaquinta wrote: "Renee wrote: "The book is a wonderful story of sacrifice, bravery, history, compassion. The writing is not "dumbed down" at all. In fact, I would hold it against any recognized classic. "Just scr..."
Petergiaquinta wrote: "Renee wrote: "The book is a wonderful story of sacrifice, bravery, history, compassion. The writing is not "dumbed down" at all. In fact, I would hold it against any recognized classic. "
Just scr..."
*sigh*
The Book Thief has been around a couple years. Whether it's going to be enduring can't be determined yet. However, The House of Seven Gables is an "enduring work of literature" and is one of the silliest books I've ever read.
Calling them "book club novels" is absolutely snobbery. I've read classics in book clubs and contemporary fiction. So if we read Faulkner in a book club, does that make him no longer worthy of being great literature?
I have not read The Tin Drum. I have, however, read enough "enduring" classics to be able to compare them to contemporary fiction that I think is just as good but hasn't been around long enough to be classified as "classic literature." That doesn't mean it won't be in 100 years.
Renee wrote: "Kallie wrote: ""Have you read The Book Thief? Even then Harry Potter books? Those are some excellent, deep and important works that our children are reading, not to mention things like The Fault in..."I have read the Book Thief and was one of the worst books that I have read in my entire life. Poorly written and full of historic inaccuracies, which sadly confuse young people about what, how and why things happened during WWII.
And no, publishing industry classifies books as YA not by the ages of the main characters, but by the target audience. The classification is far from perfect, but is the way it is.
Petergiaquinta wrote: "It's not snobbery at all."It is not snobbery to think or say, "I thought Fill in the Blank Book Title was an awful book with very little merit or substance. And then, hopefully and in certain situations--certainly in the situation of posting in this online forum--you would explain why you think or say so. More on that later.
It is snobbery to think or say, "I disliked Fill in the Blank Book Title but you loved it and that's what makes you a little bit, or a lot, lower than me and me a little bit, or a lot, better than you."
And it is a potential sign of snobbery when someone says, "Fill in the Blank Book Title is boring (or stupid, or worthless, or what have you) and then doesn't bother to explain why they think so. It is also a sign that the person is operating on a mental level below that of most 12 year old kids.
That's the attitude that pulled me into this thread in the first place and I've just been running with it since then.
Stilted education Windsorian says let's definitely not be snobbish. I have not come across a book-club in my neck of the woods but I would probably love it, regardless of what is read, simply to hear others views in a constructive way and compare my own.In addition, ANY book that gets the young away from a screen will do. Start with Enid Blyton and you can end up reading Dumas, Steinbeck, Dickens AND Zusak, whatever takes your fancy, and have a lifetime of loving books. (I am beginning to enjoy this social media thing. You are all very clever and have lots of interesting points to make).
That said. Overrated does not mean "no good". It simply means it has been over hyped. I didn't dislike the Da Vinci Code however I did dislike that everyone seemed to think it was "brilliant" when, in my opinion, it was not.
6138 wrote: "Renee wrote: "have read the Book Thief and was one of the worst books that I have read in my entire life. Poorly written and full of historic inaccuracies, which sadly confuse young people about what, how and why things happened during WWII."That is what I thought of The Book Thief. I thought it was another holocaust book but that it doesn't come close to explaining how or why WW2 happened or what is going to prevent it from happening again. If you want to be popular and sell books write another holocaust book.
But if you want to learn about WW2 how about reading The 39 Steps...which is really about WW1...but is mentioned in The Catcher In The Rye. And then STUDY the Catcher for more clues as to how this whole war was conjured up. How one man Hitler goes through Europe getting all the assets, another group comes in after the heist and burns all the evidence.(Americans). And how proud we are made to feel. Only Salinger feels dirty about what he saw and he writes about it in code in The Catcher in the Rye. Here is a case in point:
Pencey Prep is an all boys school. Girls are not allowed except if a senior brings one to the game.
However the head master daughter Selma Thurmer sometimes showed up at the game.
Selma "didn't give you a lot of horse manure about what a great guy her father was. She probably knew what a phony slob he was."
The word "phoney" is mentioned in TCITR 33 times.
I found this out here:
http://www.shmoop.com/catcher-in-the-...
Now 33 immediately brings to mind a Master Mason. Thurmer was a head master. He molds boys as referred to on page 2.
So I looked up "Thurmer and masonic" and found this:
generally accepted that the rough ashlar refers to a rough hewn stone as brought from the quarries, which in olden times was cut one eighth to one sixteenth of an inch over the required finished measure. However, the meaning of the broached thurnel in the catechism is uncertain. It seems most likely to have been derived from the Scottish operative masons to whom broach meant to rough hew, or to groove or scarify. A broaching thurmal, broaching thurmer or broaching turner was the chisel used to carry out broaching work. One form of the broaching thurmal is a narrow serrated chisel similar in many respects to the scutch, a cutting and dressing tool used by a bricklayer, probably is derived from the Old French escousser meaning to shake off. Thus the three immovable jewels referred to in the old catechisms of an apprentice logically symbolised the instructions he received for the work, represented by the trestle board; the tools he used to execute the work, represented by the broached thurmer; and his finished product, the rough ashlar.
http://www.themasonictrowel.com/educa...
A Masonic trestle board is a design board for the Master Workman (Architect) to draw his plans and designs upon to give the workmen an outline of the work to be performed. In today's terms, we might call it a blueprint.
It is one of the 3 Movable jewels.
http://www.masonic-lodge-of-education...
Ashlar
In some Masonic groupings, which such societies term jurisdictions, ashlars are used as a symbolic metaphor for progress. As described in the explanation of the First Degree Tracing Board, in Emulation (and other) rituals the rough ashlar is a stone as taken directly from the quarry, and allegorically represents the Freemason prior to his initiation; a smooth ashlar (or "perfect ashlar") is a stone that has been smoothed and dressed by the experienced stonemason, and allegorically represents the Freemason who, through education and diligence, has learned the lessons of Freemasonry and who lives an upstanding life.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ashlar
Holden is being kicked out of school because he won't apply himself.
This paragraph mentions the fictional place called Agerstown. If you have not read my post on that you should read that now and I think this oath will make more sense in relation to TCITR.
https://www.goodreads.com/topic/show/...
To me this kinda worked in well with the description of Selma, when he says that "She had a big nose and her nails were all bitten down and bleedy-looking and she had on those damn falsies that point all over the place, but you felt sort of sorry for her. ".
I believe that this bra might also be known as a bullet bra.
So I looked up Selma and the most interesting link was this one, which is a masonic lodge named Selma.
http://ncmason.net/selma320/History.htm
"July 1876 - It was agreed that the lower rooms of the lodge building be used for school purposes for the year 1877. The lodge reserved the right to send children of Master Masons living within their jurisdiction to the school free if they were unable to pay tuition."
It is the name of a masonic lodge that founded a school in 1877...which I think reflects Pency Prep, which was founded in 1888.
This lodge was instrumental in laying the cornerstone on:
"November 1, 1923 – Brother H. T. Weldon represented Selma Lodge No. 320 at the laying of the cornerstone at the Washington Memorial in Alexandria, VA."
If we go to wiki:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alexandr...
We find this:
Like the rest of Northern Virginia, as well as central Maryland, modern Alexandria has been shaped by its proximity to the nation's capital. It is largely populated by professionals working in the federal civil service, in the U.S. military, or for one of the many private companies which contract to provide services to the federal government. One of Alexandria's largest employers is the U.S. Department of Defense. Others include the Institute for Defense Analyses and the Center for Naval Analyses."
Holden says that he liked Selma Thurmer. I think it is because she knew what a phony her father was. I wonder if this also reflects back to that "crazy cannon" mentioned in the previous paragraph?
If we were to look up Our Founding FATHER we would see he was a mason:
"Such was Washington's character, that from almost the day he took his Masonic obligations until his death, he became the same man in private that he was in public. In Masonic terms, he remained "a just and upright Mason" and became a true Master Mason. Washington was, in Masonic terms, a “living stone” who became the cornerstone of American civilization. He remains the milestone others civilizations follow into liberty and equality. He is Freemasonry's “perfect ashlar” upon which countless Master Masons gauge their labors in their own Lodges and in their own communities."
http://www.gwmemorial.org/washingtonT...
When Holden goes to look for the ducks in Central Park South and he feels himself disappearing...might have reference to Grand Army Plaza.
https://www.goodreads.com/group/show/...
Yes I agree The House Of Seven Gables is an incredible book. It is timeless because people are still stealing land based on witch hunts and politicians are chosen for us before we vote for them.
Time to listen to The Wall by Pink Floyd.
Petergiaquinta wrote: "Renee wrote: "The book is a wonderful story of sacrifice, bravery, history, compassion. The writing is not "dumbed down" at all. In fact, I would hold it against any recognized classic. "Just scr..."
The Tin Drum. Is this a recommendation? If so I will add it to my "to read shelf"
Cosmic wrote: "Time to listen to The Wall by Pink Floyd."As Paulmartin might say, that sure is a "wall of text."
Wish I could say it is interesting, but ...
Mark wrote: "Petergiaquinta wrote: "It's not snobbery at all."It is not snobbery to think or say, "I thought Fill in the Blank Book Title was an awful book with very little merit or substance. And then, hope..."
But what of the last(?) option: "I thought Fill in the Blank Book Title was a boring, stupid and worthless book, but that's alright, because it doesn't make me any better or worse than you."
Mark wrote: "Cosmic wrote: "Time to listen to The Wall by Pink Floyd."As Paulmartin might say, that sure is a "wall of text."
Wish I could say it is interesting, but ..."
Does this mean I can count myself as quotable?
Paulmartin wrote: "But what of the last(?) option: "I thought ... "Absolutely. And then some sort of explanation as to why you thought all that. That's my point. I am most interested in the people who come here to exchange ideas in interesting and comprehensible (I'm looking at you, Cosmic) ways. Not people who just want to say carve their initials in the tree or mark a tree with their scent.
I guess I should have given more references from the book, The Catcher in the Rye. I would hate for you to equate my lack of eloquence with Salinger's genius."Pencey was full of crooks. Quite a few guys came from these very wealthy families, but it was full of crooks anyway. The more expensive a school is, the more crooks it has--I'm not kidding." Page 4 The Catcher in the Rye by J. D. Salinger
"Where I want to start telling is the day I left Pencey Prep. Pencey Prep is this school that's in Agerstown, Pennsylvania. You probably heard of it. You've probably seen the ads, anyway. They advertise in about a thousand magazines, always showing some hotshot guy on a horse jumping over a fence. Like as if all you ever did at Pencey was play polo all the time. I never even once saw a horse anywhere near the place. And underneath the guy on the horse's picture, it always says: "Since 1888 we have been molding boys into splendid, clear-thinking young men." Strictly for the birds. They don't do any damn more molding at Pencey than they do at any other school. And I didn't know anybody there that was splendid and clear-thinking and all. Maybe two guys. If that many. And they probably came to Pencey that way." Page 2 The Catcher in the Rye by J.D. Salinger
"There were never many girls at all at the football games. Only seniors were allowed to bring girls with them. It was a terrible school, no matter how you looked at it. I like to be somewhere at least where you can see a few girls around once in a while, even if they're only scratching their arms or blowing their noses or even just giggling or something. Old Selma Thurmer--she was the headmaster's daughter--showed up at the games quite often, but she wasn't exactly the type that drove you mad with desire. She was a pretty nice girl, though. I sat next to her once in the bus from Agerstown and we sort of struck up a conversation. I liked her. She had a big nose and her nails were all bitten down and bleedy-looking and she had on those damn falsies that point all over the place, but you felt sort of sorry for her. What I liked about her, she didn't give you a lot of horse manure about what a great guy her father was. She probably knew what a phony slob he was." Page 3 The Catcher in the Rye by J.D. Salinger
Carlie wrote: "Kallie, I agree with you to some extent, but I don't want everything I read to be intellectually challenging. Yes I want my thoughts to be provoked, I want to keep thinking about a book long after ..."I didn't mean to suggest that everything I find worth reading is intellectually challenging, but I have to enjoy the writing style and usually when I do enjoy the writing, I'm enjoying something that entertains but goes beyond entertainment -- some perception of character and or place upon which the writer has turned a fresh point of view expressed in fresh imagery and language. For me, intellectually challenging reading requires focus and thought because the material and sometimes the use of language (even though it's in English) is more complex, or maybe not in the same English we speak today, or introduces an unfamiliar world with somewhat different values and invites comparison with and questioning of old and new values. I think reading more difficult text and finding that one enjoys it is important for the same reason any challenge is important: building confidence and acquiring new tastes. Kids should read any and everything they can get their hands on; I did, and some of it was real crap filched from my stepfather's nightstand (Mandingo, anyone?). But I do think that while in school they should read, besides 'To Kill a Mockingbird' enduring English language works because those works are challenging and rewarding and good experience with struggling to understand what is at first a bit beyond one's comprehension. As for snobbery, a recent trend to favor what is 'accessible' over writing that challenges strikes me as another kind of snobbery; a sort of 'Well, I'm very smart and don't get this so it can't be that good.'
I don't know about calling something like The Da Vinci Code or Twilight overrated. They're huge sellers but they're not considered by any critic to be classic or anything like that.I will vehemently argue against Moby-Dick and Ulysses as being overrated, especially since they're two of the books that more people claim to read than actually read, so I suspect that a fair amount of people who say they are overrated have only gotten through a couple chapters or so.
I think The Catcher in the Rye is very overrated, and I've written extensively on the topic. I also hate just about everything from the Beat Generation, but I'm not sure if I'd call them overrated; I just personally am not into that kind of literature.
Patrick wrote: "and I've written extensively on the topic."Where, Patrick? Here in Goodreads or in another forum?
"Hate" is a strong word. I suspect you mean you don't see what all the fuss is about. Have you read extensively of the Beat canon or just a few representative samples?
Patrick wrote: "e Catcher in the Rye is very overrated, and I've written extensively on the topic"I went and took a look at what you are currently reading. Some very good classics. So since you have your David Copperfield book close by read the first page. Of course David Copperfield is mentioned in the first paragraph of The Catcher in The Rye. Note that Holden Caulfield is made up of caul and field. Similar to David Copperfield sharing the last suffix. And on the first page of David Copperfield we have mention of a caul. I think the fact that he (Holden) mentions David Copperfield and the word caul is used in Caulfield and in the book (David Copperfield) this is significant.
For those of you that may not have your David Copperfield book close this is what it says:
"I was born with a caul, which was advertised for sale, in the newspapers, at the low price of fifteen guineas. Whether sea-going people were short of money about that time, or were short of faith and preferred cork jackets, I don't know; all I know is, that there was but one solitary bidding, and that was from an attorney connected with the bill-broking business, who offered two pounds in cash, and the balance in sherry, but declined to be guaranteed from drowning on any higher bargain."
David Copperfield by Charles Dickens
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Caul
Makes me think that something about the Catcher is intentionally veiled. And also why you need to read the books mentioned in the Catcher to further understand the book. Because if you try to do it outside of these references you will probably come up with an entirely different interpretation from the one you would infer after reading and watching and listening to music mentioned in the book.
I love Hard Times which I see you are also reading.
Didn't see anything that you had written extensively about the Catcher in the Rye. Maybe you could recap it.
Cosmic wrote: " Maybe you could recap it."Or just link to it, if your extensive writing about that book is available online.
Cosmic wrote: "born with a caul"Fascinating stuff. Nice work. Your previous posts read, to my eyes and mind, as rather disjointed stuff and I didn't have the patience to make heads nor tails of it (just being honest). But this is quite an interesting connection.
I've never read all that much Dickens, never read David Copperfield. More for the "to read" list.
Mark wrote: "Fascinating stuff. Nice work. Your previous posts read, to my eyes and mind, as rather disjointed stuff and I didn't have the patience to make heads nor tails of i..."I did try to fix it a bit by bold facing certain text.
Hope this helps
Basically Selma is the name of a masonic lodge that was instrumental in laying the cornerstone to the lodge in Alexandra, a suburb of D.C.. Anyone who has studied the city of D.C. will know that it was designed by masons. Alexandra was the strategic place for the military complex before WW2. The hardship that was imposed on Germany after WW1 was a product of Wilson and Churchill and led to When Money Dies: The Nightmare Of The Weimar Hyper Inflation incredible hardships for the German people. I believe there was more to it than this but this book gives a good background.
The name Thurmer is a tool used by masons to mold rough stone and is a symbol of the young masonic initiate and the discipline of becoming a mason. All the jewels referred to are educational symbols.
Selma founded a school just for their children...a similar connection to The Catcher in that Pencey Prep was an elite school.
By the way Holden is a car and in a symbolic way he is a vehicle that Salinger uses to explain WW2 in a symbolic way, as he travels through the book and meets different people and refers to different historical events.
I don't think the Catcher is read in this way, because of cliff notes has guided our perception, but I hope to enlarge the meaning of this book. It was the best they could do since he wouldn't let them turn it into a movie.
The 39 Steps is a movie that Holden took his sister Phoebe to ten times. She memorized the lines. But Holden says he hates the movies so one should be compelled to read the book.
Cosmic wrote: "I did try to fix it a bit by bold facing certain text."I don't think it's something that can be fixed with bold text. I think it's a case of building a context. To me, the buried lead is that you believe CitR is Salinger's somewhat allegorical treatment of WW II.
I am not sure what larger picture you are trying to fit "Thurmer" and "Selma" into.
The "caul" connection grabbed my attention, but it seems like it might have been a random tasty morsel in what is otherwise a heaping plate of crazy.
Just calling 'em as I see 'em. Maybe it's more a case of what you're saying being beyond me.
Mark wrote: "Just calling 'em as I see 'em. Maybe it's more a case of what you're saying being beyond me. "Better get well-acquainted with numerology if you want to follow his train of thought ;)
Mkfs wrote: "if you want to follow his train of thought ;)"I suspect I know something about what kind of train it is.
Patrick wrote: "I will vehemently argue against Moby-Dick and Ulysses as being overrated, especially since they're two of the books that more people claim to read than actually read, so I suspect that a fair amount of people who say they are overrated have only gotten through a couple chapters or so."This is an often-underappreciated point in the discussion.
Many (possibly most) of the posts are people claiming that a book is overrated because they did not like it or could not read it. That is the moral equivalent of calling a symphony boring, or bebop discordant, simply because one has nothing to compare it to.
Personally, I agree about Catcher In The Rye and the beats (I believe I specifically called out Kerouac earlier in this thread) being overrated -- not because I did not enjoy them (Kerouac I somewhat enjoy, Salinger is decent as well), but because I do not think they have enduring appeal outside of a couple of generations (Silent and Boomer, possibly X as well).
I could be wrong, of course -- there will always be angsty teenagers out there. But is Catcher In The Rye truly the work that is going to speak to them? Or will it be forgotten by the mainstream, much like Sorrows Of Young Werther, when something comes along that speaks more directly to the current crop of youth?
Mark wrote: "I suspect I know something about what kind of train it is."Blizzard of Ozz style?
Mkfs wrote: "Blizzard of Ozz style?"All aboard...!
Maybe this is too obvious, maybe not, but our protagonist in Catcher with his refusal to grow up and buckle down and accept the responsibilities and rules of playing the game of life is holding onto the caul, instead of moving forward.
My own favorite passage in literature about cauls comes from a short story by James Hurst called "The Scarlet Ibis." The crippled younger brother in the story was born with a caul. The narrator says, "Everybody thought he was going to die--everybody except Aunt Nicey, who had delivered him. She said he would live because he was born in a caul, and cauls were made from Jesus' nightgown."
That doesn't really relate to Holden or anything else. I just felt like sharing...
Just because Catcher in the Rye was narrated in the masterfully consistently maintained voice of an angst ridden teen, everyone assumes this was the audience that Salinger was trying to connect to. I think it was the subsequent embrace of the book by educators and its prominence on high school and college reading lists that did that. I'm sure someone has tracked down the provenance of how it got to be the angst teen novel of several generations.It's a little bit like assuming that Anthony Burgess clearly wrote A Clockwork Orange for extremely violent but eventually quasi-rehabilitated young men or that only heroin addicts would want to read Junkie. It would pretty easy to go on with this game, but you get the idea.
When an actor flawlessly stays in the character of, say, a psychopathic killer, we say that is one brilliant actor. When a writer so strongly maintains the voice of a teenager in a certain period of American history, never breaking from character (so to speak) one iota and manages to tell a fairly complicated story while doing so, some of us feel free to accuse him of creating a character who annoyingly got on our nerves, as if that wasn't a distinct possibility if not the point.
Mark wrote: " When a writer so strongly maintains the voice of a teenager in a certain period of American history, never breaking from character (so to speak) one iota and manages to tell a fairly complicated story while doing so, some of us feel free to accuse him of creating a character who annoyingly got on our nerves, as if that wasn't a distinct possibility if not the point."Yup.
CiTR should be read three times. First, quickly, when you're a teenager. And twice more when you're past fifty, slowly, savoring every bite, with a bottle of good wine.
Monty J wrote: "Yup"I knew this part of the conversation would flush you out, Monty!
So true. Have a great weekend all!
Petergiaquinta wrote: "Mkfs wrote: "Blizzard of Ozz style?"All aboard...!
Maybe this is too obvious, maybe not, but our protagonist in Catcher with his refusal to grow up and buckle down and accept the responsibilitie..."
He's 16 years old, man. He's hardly begun, and you really want him to grow up and buckle down? Sheesh.
Kallie wrote: "He's 16 years old, man."How do you know his age? I've always thought there should be a way of knowing this for all Goodreaders, so you know what weight class you're wrestling in.
Mark wrote: "Just because Catcher in the Rye was narrated in the masterfully consistently maintained voice of an angst ridden teen, everyone assumes this was the audience that Salinger was trying to connect to...."I wouldn't say that. More likely, angst-ridden teens are the only ones who will be interested in reading it. Everyone older will have already had their adolescent experience, and who wants to revisit that?
This probably reflects a certain bias on my part. The "coming of age story" has been taking a greater and greater share of fiction and film (though curiously, not drama) over the past two decades, and holds absolutely zero interest for me.
To be fair, Catcher In The Rye does it better than most, as it doesn't try to pinpoint a specific moment or experience where the character "entered adulthood" -- instead depicting maturity as an growing realization (along with a sense of dread).
Mkfs wrote: "Everyone older will have already had their adolescent experience, and who wants to revisit that?"Jeepers, where do I start?
The transition from juvenile to adult is the most important and fascinating time in the life of any member of the animal kingdom, for if it is not made successfully the consequences are terminal, sometimes even for humans.
I have met many adults walking this earth who DIDN'T make that transition smoothly or successfully. The jails and prisons are full of them. Crime movies are based on them. However the transition is made, the consequences are permanent and major. This transition contains the future of mankind.
Some great books and films are based on this transition: Rebel Without a Cause, East of Eden, The Outsiders, Huckleberry Finn, Lolita, Romeo and Juliet... .
Every human being views the world through a filter of perception that becomes solidified during adolescence. It defines our concept of right and wrong, good or bad, safe and unsafe. What can be more fascinating that placing a magnifying glass over the molding forces of the human personality? The mistakes that are made would fill ten oil tankers, a million libraries.
Steinbeck got it right when he devoted so much ink to the concept of free will in East of Eden.
"Catcher In The Rye does it better than most, as it doesn't try to pinpoint a specific moment or experience where the character "entered adulthood" -- instead depicting maturity as an growing realization (along with a sense of dread)."
Agreed. Holden shows clear evidence of striving to become an adult (acting protectively toward Jane Gallagher; ordering alcohol with the intention of drinking responsibly; protecting the young--teenaged probably--prostitute by not having sex; standing his ground with the bully pimp/elevator operator; conversing with adults on the train, in the nightclub and cafe; showing refined taste in music and theater; fussing over the young boys at the museum, erasing the foul graffiti on the subway wall, acting protectively toward Phoebe; being self-aware and introspective about his personal problems; etc.)
Mkfs wrote: "This probably reflects a certain bias on my part. The "coming of age story" has been taking a greater and greater share of fiction and film (though curiously, not drama) over the past two decades, and holds absolutely zero interest for me."First of all, since there's been a recent revelation on this thread that someone I assumed was much older was only 16 (if I'm understanding correctly), I would like to ask, Mkfs, how old are you?
Secondly, "over the past two decades" would be synonymous with "since 1994." Are you suggesting that coming of age stories have been MORE plentiful in the last 20 years than any time prior?
And when you say something "holds absolutely interest zero for me," how is that supposed to remotely matter to anyone but you?
Again if you're 16 or 12 or thereabouts, I get where you're coming from. But if you're a decade or so older than that, I'd question the egocentricity of your views and suggest that you don't really know enough about the historical trends in fiction, film and drama for any appreciable stretch of history to say what is and isn't different about the last twenty years contrasted to what came before.
For the record, I don't either. But I'm not so full of myself that I assume I do with such imagined authority.
Kallie wrote: "He's 16 years old, man."Catcher isn't your typical coming of age story. Holden resists the idea of growing up, longs for a past he cannot return to, and rejects the values of the adult world. At the same time, he is irresistibly drawn toward this world he rejects, and the tension this creates in him is slowly and inexorably pulling him toward the edge of that cliff he is teetering on as the three days in New York wear on.
Holden himself is the physical embodiment of this conflict. Only 16, as pointed out, he is over six feet tall with grey hair and handsome good looks. This gains him entry to the adult world and allows him access to the behaviors he finds so equally fascinating and repulsive. He wants to hold onto an unrealistic and uncompromising ideal of childhood despite his rebelling biology, an ideal he likens to the unchanging exhibits in the museum he loves so dearly. And his ideals are so pure and so uncompromising that they can only lead him to the nuthouse or the cemetery.
In the flawed world we live in, there is no room for the purity of the values Holden clings to. Thus, his "coming of age" by the end of the novel is necessary and inevitable because we certainly don't want Holden insane or dead in those final pages, but it is also tinged with a terrible sadness because it involves Holden's accepting the horribly flawed reality of the adult world. So Catcher is a "coming of age" story, I suppose, but in its own way it's also a tragedy that transcends any kind of easy classification.
Petergiaquinta wrote: "Kallie wrote: "He's 16 years old, man."LOL. Oh Jesus. I give up! I thought Kallie meant that crazy train, numerology dude was 16 years old.
What a sap I've been!
I disagree with all excepting these two:The Da Vinci Code Yes Very OVERRATED.
Twilight Yes. Overrated.
The others are classics and I have read some of them more than once. Yet I have yet to read Waiting for Godot and will defer judgment on that one.
I will admit that many of these are difficult reads but have found that they are worth the extra effort and improve with repeated reading.
Don't beat yourself up, Mark. You're a rock star of free thinking and I've enjoyed your witty banter. If you're not a writer, you should be, brother. If you don't want to be a writer, can I have permission to mine your previous posts and steal the gold nuggets you've left behind?
Mark wrote: "And when you say something "holds absolutely interest zero for me," how is that supposed to remotely matter to anyone but you?"That is, in fact, why I followed that statement with "This probably reflects a certain bias on my part."
The observation about an increasing share of coming-of-age-stories to other narratives is just that: an observation. It may be inaccurate. I performed no exhaustive study. The choice of "two decades" reflects that it has been noticeable for more than one decade, but less than three decades.
A quick, informal* (and by no means rigorous) sanity check bears this out: an IMDB keyword search for "coming of age" returns 2,883 titles. Sorting by release date shows that the first 600 titles are from before 1994.
(* I acknowledge that it is flawed to use IMDB to measure anything produced before 1990, and that short/independent films are going to be over-represented after that date.)
Monty J wrote: "The transition from juvenile to adult is the most important and fascinating time in the life of any member of the animal kingdom, for if it is not made successfully the consequences are terminal, sometimes even for humans."It is an important and difficult time, and many (if not most) people do not get through it smoothly. It is important -- even necessary -- to have a body of literature covering this transition, with which readers can identify and perhaps seek solace or answers.
That said, I am of the opinion that it is not inherently fascinating or interesting to those who are not immediately faced with the transition (either by going through it themselves, or by having friends/family go through it).
Why write a coming-of-age novel to deal with higher themes, unless the coming-of-age is precisely the theme? Why not use adult situations and concerns?
My opinion is that Catcher In The Rye is over-rated precisely because of the 'angsty teenager' nature of the story. It does not transcend the coming-of-age tale in the way that, for example, Moby Dick transcends whale-hunting manuals.
People may be said to have their own personal White Whales, but they are not said to have their own personal Fields of Rye (and to forestall the inevitable: nor do they reach for the Gold Rings of the Catcher in the Rye, instead reaching for the standard Brass Rings).
But don't we struggle with compassion and cruelty?Don't we long for something that can never return?
Don't we wish keenly and painfully for a perfection that doesn't exist in the temporal world?
I think you're totally wrong here limiting Catcher to an angsty teenage coming of age novel. Or maybe you're missing some of what it is to be human. But if you can recognize it in Melville, I don't know why it's so hard for you to see it in Salinger.
Petergiaquinta wrote: "But if you can recognize it in Melville, I don't know why it's so hard for you to see it in Salinger. "My answer to that is obvious: because Catcher in the Rye isn't all it's cracked up to be ;)
Well, chacun a son gout, but with cracks like that, get ready for some push back, Mr. Mitchum...
I should propose as a metric for how overrated a book is: The number of ad hominem claims (or suppositions of maturity, education, knowledge, morality, etc that are based on the opinions expressed, rather than on the means of expression) made by supporters of a book in regards to its detractors.
You'll find it holds for Twilight as well as Catcher.
Mkfs wrote: "Why not use adult situations and concerns?"Mental illness is not an adult concern?
Human compassion is not an adult concern?
Teenage prostitution is not an adult concern?
Pedophilia is not an adult concern?
Dysfunctional schoolteachers is not an adult concern?
Hypocrisy is not an adult concern?
Redemption is not an adult concern?
For a more detailed analysis, here is a link to my somewhat lengthy assessment of CiTR: http://redroom.com/member/monty-heyin...
Mkfs wrote: "You'll find it holds for Twilight as well as Catcher. "Lols...so now you've exposed yourself as just another troll who no longer merits a thoughtful response. And I had such hopes for you...
Monty J wrote: "For a more detailed analysis, here is a link to my somewhat lengthy assessment of CiTR: "Yup, read it (along with your one on Gatsby) when linked in one of your previous posts. It gave me much to think about, but ultimately did not change my opinion of the book.
You obviously read much more into the Catcher in the Rye than I did, and got much more out of it.
What can I say, I did not like the book, and I do not see the greatness in it. In response to Petergiaquinta's comment, if that is considered trolling here, then so be it.
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'm on another thread where we've pulled apart the various strands of The Great Gatsby so much that you'd think there would be nothing left. But the book has an amazing capacity to yield up more when you least expect it.
I've heard your take on it--excellent prose, story is "meh"--more than once before and I have to confess I don't get it. What is it that you find to flawed about or lacking in the storyline? I could understand taking a book like The Old Man and the Sea (great prose, one-dimensional storyline) or like The Road (shitty writing, imho, one-dimensional storyline) to task for having a shallow or sort of unsophisticated storyline, but what about The Great Gatsby makes it so in your view?