The Catcher in the Rye
discussion
The Most Overrated Books
I'm re-reading Catcher and don't find Holden snotty, totally self-absorbed, psycho, or many of the labels that have been suggested in this thread. He is polite and kind to elderly Mr. Spencer, even though the man pompously rubs it in that Holden has flunked out of Pencey and other prep schools. (Salinger gives no indication why, at this point.) H thinks with distaste about a former head master who was friendlier to parents who look wealthy and high class, but perfunctory and fake with those who are not. I call this discriminating, not smart-ass. He talks about how he sometimes acts like a 12 year old and sometimes feels and acts much older than his 16 years; his behavior toward Spencer and thoughts about the snobby head master are examples of the latter. I've heard the book called sentimental (in its depiction of Holden?); that may be fair, but the character is raw, and going through some difficult feelings, as we later learn.
Have you guys heard the song "Institutionalized" by the band Suicidal tendencies? If it wasn't written directly for this book, I would be shocked. It is literally the perfect theme song for CATR.
http://www.darklyrics.com/lyrics/suic...Ian wrote: "Have you guys heard the song "Institutionalized" by the band Suicidal tendencies? If it wasn't written directly for this book, I would be shocked. It is literally the perfect theme song for CATR."
I had to go look for the lyrics.
I think this is exactly how Holden felt. After ask he was trying took make sense of their phony world. Since phony is norm it is easy to get the sheep back in line.
Ian wrote: "Have you guys heard the song "Institutionalized" by the band Suicidal tendencies? If it wasn't written directly for this book, I would be shocked. It is literally the perfect theme song for CATR."After listening to that song I think I need to be institutionalized. "All I want is a Pepsi, and she wouldn't give it to me, All I wanted was a Pepsi, just one Pepsi, and she wouldn't give it to me. Just a Pepsi." Award winning lyrics right there.
I think you are right, though, about this being Holden's theme song. Which may be why I hate Catcher In The Rye.
Emma wrote: "Ian wrote: "Have you guys heard the song "Institutionalized" by the band Suicidal tendencies? If it wasn't written directly for this book, I would be shocked. It is literally the perfect theme song..."I didn't listen to the words but I guess what I got out of that line was he wasn't looking for anything big from them but they were so full of their own expectations that they were not listening to him. Most problems are not just one individual in families anyway. They carry the symptom of the health of the family. The family in Holden's case is also the school.
I hope you might take a look at my discussion "Breaking the Code Of The Catcher In The Rye" study group. I want to show a different interpretation of that book. That it is really about WW2. That it I'd coded, just like they had code breakers in WW2 he has created a book within a story. I have to confess not really liking this book the first time I read it. I thought it was stupid that he kept asking where did the ducks go. I will have that add one of my topics soon.
I find it ridiculous to suggest Waiting for Godot is over-rated. I am equally surprised no-one has defended it.
but at the top of my list of contemporary over-rateds are "The Elegance of the Hedgehog," "Edgar Sawtelle," and "Let the Great World Spin." I finished all three, but still wonder why so many applaud them. If you want to know why one person thought "Elegance" was good, you can read my review. I loved the book because it made me think. I have always assumed that genius is distributed equally throughout the world in the same proportions regardless of educational level and have often wondered what happens to a "genius" African bushman or a Afghan peasant? How does genius manifest itself in those circumstances?
Our schools don't do a good job with brilliant students and Paloma's situation is an excellent example. There are just as many exceptional students who drop out of school as slow learners and yet most of the focus is on the slow learners.
This book tackles both of those problem beautifully, but I agree it isn't a book that appeals to a wide variety of readers. It just depends on what you are looking for in a book. These books are not plot driven and the ideas they generate are the point of the book rather than action.
"Elegance" is not a book for everyone because the lead characters are very bitter, which can make people think they're whiny and arrogant. That's not the case, though. They're just forced into a defensive position by their society, they've built a bunker out of books, a hedgehog disguise out of culture, in order to survive.
Thank you Daniel and Anna, I started that book but didn't understand what it was about. I thought I had missed something and quit too soon. I think I will give it another try.
Bernie wrote: "I find it ridiculous to suggest Waiting for Godot is over-rated. I am equally surprised no-one has defended it."Well, Godot was in the list posted by OP but no one has actually made a real argument in favor of that (incredibly misguided) inclusion, so... I guess no one's felt the need to defend it.
For a book to be considered "overrated" there must be a difference of opinion among readers that stirs up controversy and debate. Therefore, one could argue that only the "best" books are by definition eligible to become "overrated." Read them, dear Readers, read them all. Then decide for yourselves and join the eternal debate---good, bad, indifferent. Each opinion carries equal weight. There is much we can learn from one another, especially from those with whom we disagree.
When I first read The Catcher in the Rye I fought that it had a lot of dead end ideas. It was like he was saying something and he wasn't telling you everything. Here is an example:And that business about getting up early to see the first show at Radio City Music Hall depressed me. If somebody, some girl in an awful-looking hat, for instance, comes all the way to New York--from Seattle, Washington, for God's sake--and ends up getting up early in the morning to see the goddam first show at Radio City Music Hall, it makes me so depressed I can't stand it. I'd've bought the whole three of them a hundred drinks if only they hadn't told me that
If you look up Radio City Music Hall's History you might see how it may have played a part in WW2.
It has been interesting to learn about WW2 from Salinger point of view. Code breaking was very WW2 and a very clever writing style.
So this is what I have started to do in my discussion group "Breaking The Code To The Catcher In The Rye"
Hope some of you will join me
S.W. wrote: "For a book to be considered "overrated" there must be a difference of opinion among readers that stirs up controversy and debate. Therefore, one could argue that only the "best" books are by defin..."
Message to Daniel posting 386I believe I defended WAITING FOR GODOT. Now I gotta search this message thread to confirm that.
Oops! There it is. Message 330. And you immediately responded.
Daniel wrote: "Bernie wrote: "I find it ridiculous to suggest Waiting for Godot is over-rated. I am equally surprised no-one has defended it."Well, Godot was in the list posted by OP but no one has actually mad..."
True Daniel, But there are comments such as "agree with all but two, and I disagree strenuously that they are over rated, and those are Moby Dick and The Stranger."
BTW, I had not even noticed The Stranger in there, another ridiculous inclusion. One I would have in there is To Kill a Mockingbird,a very good book, but way too high on most best lists , IMO.
The Stranger in the original French (L'Etranger) would not be on that list, of course. The language makes the story. I can't say the same for Waiting for Godot (En attendant Godot), however.
Geoffrey, I didn't think you were defending it as much as just discussing its possible themes; excuse the omission :)Bernie, that's true, and those comments are quite infuriating, but they don't pose a real argument against the book. They're just bland opinions, which hardly make fertile ground for discussion.
I do not consider Gatsby to be over-rated, but a lot of the others I would. Waiting for Godot, yes. From a perspective of the classics, have tried Jane Austen and got bored with her. Malcolm Lowry's Under The Volcano, unreadable and over-rated. A lot of Henry James.
Andrea wrote: "I loved "The Catcher in the Rye" when I read it in high school, and later as a high school English teacher myself, I saw many students identify with and love that novel like no other they had read...."I got the impression, when reading this book in high school, that it was the first time many of my classmates realized that popular people could have faults, that authority figures could be wrong, and generally that the world is more grey than black-and-white.
Perhaps the popularity of Catcher In The Rye among teenagers lies in having one's opinions/suspicions validated in print for the first time, much like the popularity of junkie/f-up fiction among twenty-year-olds.
I did not like Catcher In The Rye when I read it, and I believe it is over-rated -- but I do feel that the right time to read it is during one's teenage years. After that, it's a bit like reading fairy tales in your teens, or The Sorrows of Young Werther in your thirties.
Bernie wrote: "I find it ridiculous to suggest Waiting for Godot is over-rated..."I am surprised as well, but for a different reason.
Waiting For Godot is a play; it has an entirely different purpose than the novels it has been grouped with.
I remember that it was required reading, along with a few other plays, in an English literature class that did not make much distinction between poems, prose, plays, and novels.
Most readers/students are accustomed to narrative (short stories and novels) and find plays to be difficult to read ("boring"). Few are every exposed to the theatrical production of any play before or after reading it (except the occasional grainy Shakespeare play from PBS). My question for anyone criticizing Waiting For Godot is: have you actually seen a (non-amateur) production of it?
As for whether Waiting For Godot is over-rated, I am on the fence here. I enjoyed it (along with other absurdist works), and it served an important role as an example of what can be (and often, regrettably too often, is) done with modern literature. I do not believe for a second that everyone will enjoy it, or even should. But it is, unlike most of the books on the original post's list, well-worth the encounter.
As with Shakespeare I prefer seeing or hearing Beckett to reading him, but his work and others on this list don't belong just because they are challenging. I wonder if that is sometimes the motive for declaring a book overrated; it challenges our point-of-view, or reading skill, or whatever.
You might be on to something, Mkfs, I only now remember that I watched Godot represented (on Youtube, but still) instead of only on paper. The sense of dreariness and slow rhythm of it all are hard to get on paper.
I'm sorry about the Godot aficionados here, but found it to be wanting and sorely lacking in keeping my interest. I did see an amateur production, though why that would matter -- it was well done and well acted. But as for the play itself, like looking at a Mark Rothko or Jackson Pollock painting. Did not cut it for me.
JohnI agree with you about Rothko and Pollock. Way too minimal for me. But Godot works for me.
William wrote: "The Stranger in the original French (L'Etranger) would not be on that list, of course. The language makes the story. I can't say the same for Waiting for Godot (En attendant Godot), however."That is a bit of an Anglocentric comment in it presumes the list compiler was not referring to L'Etranger (as is likely) and the title was translated into English for convenience. As for Godot, it probably does not matter as Beckett did the English translation. A Beckett scholar might tell us whether the Irishman wrote the first drafts in English or French. BTW, I believe the language of Godot is its greatest strength.
Kallie wrote: "As with Shakespeare I prefer seeing or hearing Beckett to reading him, but his work and others on this list don't belong just because they are challenging. I wonder if that is sometimes the motive..."I agree Kallie, it is better to see or hear a quality production, but a few rare plays are eminently readable as texts, because of the fine dialogue (and perhaps minimal stage directions) Two that I have read and re-read are Godot and Pinter's The Caretaker.
Achim wrote: "Hi there, why hasn't anybody until now put Hesse's The Glass Bead Game on the list? When I was much younger than today and adored Hesse, I finally embarked on the Glasperlenspiel. And ..."I always struggle with Hesse but he did win the Nobel Prize and Goethe Prize. You always have to consider that our individual tastes might have blind spots. I find the Australian Nobel Laureate Patrick White a bore.
Achim wrote: "Hi there, why hasn't anybody until now put Hesse's The Glass Bead Game on the list? When I was much younger than today and adored Hesse, I finally embarked on the Glasperlenspiel. And ..."I really wanted to like Glasperlenspiel, and it was fairly interesting at first, but it just dwindled and dawdled. The end is a bit of a shocker, but not worth the long read to get there. But I am an avid board gamer and sometimes consider what games might be like the Glas Bead game. Perhaps the Chinese game go?
Rating books... a bit like herding cats; perhaps possible - but maybe more trouble than it's worth, and ultimately, it may be of little value.Evaluating/appreciating art is bound to be somewhat subjective. And rating, not based on objective criteria, will inevitably be based on taste; and tastes change with the times and with relative age.
Of course, there is always a potential pitfall when rating art using objective criteria; too often the result is based on technique and technical elements, whereas the real value of the art may actually be the ability to create emotional impact and response.
A great book is a product of both art and craft, and when both are present to a high degree, the work has the potential for becoming a classic. But when rating books, the differences between the two can make the task difficult – if not impossible.
A clear and concise technical treatise may employ the utmost in the craft of writing, but isn’t likely to be viewed as art. On the other hand, a ‘best-seller’ may thumb its nose at the writing craft, but still tell a story that moves the reader to laughter and/or tears. Both can be rated highly for what they accomplish.
In the end, rating books would seem to be a complex combination of both the subjective and the objective. Endurance over time is probably the best test. In the short-term, however, when looking for ratings, I’ll stick with the recommendations of those who generally share my views and whose opinions I trust.
Bill wrote: "Rating books... a bit like herding cats; perhaps possible - but maybe more trouble than it's worth, and ultimately, it may be of little value.Evaluating/appreciating art is bound to be somewhat s..."
Very good summary, Bill.
Geoffrey wrote: "Anne HawnThe fact that anyone of them becomes a "classic autor" begs the question of the worth of those left behind. There have always been very worthwhile writers from times past whose stellar qu..."
I agree. What causes a work or an author to be noted is sometimes not something worth noting, yet superior individuals and efforts often go unnoticed. We see this happen in modern times, as someone becomes famous, seemingly without cause. Then "everyone" knows about them, and that in itself becomes reason to pay attention. I love using sites like Goodreads, because it helps sort through all the billions of titles you cannot possibly have time to read for yourself, and find the ones you may actually be interested in reading-because of the help of other readers like you.
I find the Australian Nobel Laureate Patrick White a bore. Have you tried The Vivisector? (I couldn't get into Voss, but liked the former, about a painter, quite a lot). Martha you are so right; Goodreads is a great resource and forum; I'm very grateful to have it.
Moby Dick is the most boring book I've ever read (and that's saying something) and Twilight in my opinion is a badly written, sexist piece of shit. But I did enjoy Catcher in the Rye and found Holden's character relatable, even if he was slightly whiny.
I really enjoyed The Great Gatsby and The Catcher in the Rye. It's not a classic where I live, so I never had to read them in school. Wanted to read them, liked them and everything was relaxed.
Elyse wrote: "I loved The Corrections!!!! Fabulous characters and character development."I enjoyed it too. But I don't remember any scenes so well as those from, for example, Moby Dick. Or Catcher, or Nine Stories. It's hard to say why some books' scenes stick with you and others don't.
I read the Hesse book in my youthful days and found it fascinating. I tried to read it again this year after nearly a half century .....yawn zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz.I did read the Hesse novella about a vagabond who exhibited strong scholarly talents in his youth only to throw it all away and become a "hippie". Anyone out there know the title of that one?
Geoffrey wrote: "I read the Hesse book in my youthful days and found it fascinating. I tried to read it again this year after nearly a half century .....yawn zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz.I did read the Hesse n..."
Are you thinking of "Narcissus and Goldumund" or "Under the Wheel"? Most of his stuff is very naive. But he did manage one timeless work, Steppenwolf, about aging and mourning the loss of youth.
Geoffrey wrote: "I read the Hesse book in my youthful days and found it fascinating. I tried to read it again this year after nearly a half century .....yawn zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz.I did read the Hesse n..."
'Journey to the East' resonated for 'hippies' too, and certainly 'Siddhartha.' And there was 'Damien.' All those books were important to me back in the day. They involved characters who could be called 'seekers,' who couldn't find spiritual solace in Western values and religion.
Ash wrote: "Twilight in my opinion is a badly written, sexist piece of shit."Thanks for that comment. Laughed until I fell down. Made my day.
DGB
The Catcher in the Rye --strongly agree
Moby Dick --strongly disagree
The Great Gatsby -agree
Waiting for Godot -haven't read
The Stranger -disagree
Ulysses - haven't read
Atlas Shrugged - strongly agree
The Da Vinci Code - not sure who rates it highly? It's fine, but it's no Great Book.
Twilight - haven't read
It genuinely amazes me how someone feels that The Stranger is overrated and at the same time feels that Moby Dick lives up to its reputation!
Achim wrote: "So what's a Great Book? I no..."Good question for discussion. For one thing, a great book opens my mind and imagination to another person's or peoples' inner and outer world, and does so in a unique voice and style (which can be subtle and hard to define).
Maria 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..."
I might put Twilight on the list, never Catcher in the Rye. Why should it be on overrated list? I'll tell you why it should be on highly rated list. The work communicated the stressful period of going into adulthood. Millions of teens have related to it for decades. Knocking it would be like a insensitive male knocking a book that touches the female experience because he isn't female and hasn't went through what they go through.
Da Vinci Code isn't groundbreaking. Not as important as "Catcher" so you have a point there.
Add Lord of The Flies.
Lyndsey wrote: "Add Lord of The Flies."That's what the publishers first thought. Golding had to take it to around 50 publishers before it was accepted, only after edits removing all details about a 3rd world war. 1 line was accidently left in that seems completely random.
I really liked Lord of the Flies. At first I thought it was a little slow with all the details of the island. But what I liked about it was the relationship between Piggy and the other children. Piggy had a sense of family and duty. The Hunter click seem to become fixated on their own agenda, in this case killing the pig.I am really glad mentioned this book because I am in a book discussion that I think this book really relates to and a for a lot of us LOTF was required reading. The book is called
Quiet: The Power of Introverts in a World That Can't Stop Talking My thought before reading Quiet was that the book's theme was if we raise people in an institution we will have to create an institution to police them.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8ogCc8...
My conclusion is still the same but I guess it has taken on a new dimension.
I think it is important for us to consider that the right answers may not come from the most dynamic speaker
Lyndsey wrote: "Add Lord of The Flies."The problem with LOTF is that it is poorly written and the reader must supply a subtext, fascism, that is infinitely more compelling than the author's stated purpose, which is a dystopian rebuttal to and parody of an earlier book, The Coral Island (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Cora... "...Among the novel's major themes are the civilising effect of Christianity, 19th-century British imperialism in the South Pacific, and the importance of hierarchy and leadership.")
Fascism was alive and well in the U.K. during Wm. Golding's lifetime, and his concerns about it came through, seemingly unconsciously. It took a few years to sink-in to a post-World War II reading public still throbbing from the painful memories of the destructive force of fascism.
Published in 1954, the book initially sold fewer than 3,000 copies and went out of print before becoming a best-seller in 1960, but not because of high story craft or the author's literary skill. The book struck a nerve of public consciousness.
Democracy has been weakened, having been under attack for decades from Right-wing extremists using Ayn Rand's Atlas Shrugged as their bible, a book published on the heels of LOTF, in 1957. LOTF's warning is more relevant than ever.
For the book to be very meaningful, I think requires a sensitivity to its inherent though apparently unintended political implications.
In that case, LOTF would not be a Great Book: It is, I agree, not very well written, but it strikes a nerve, across generations.But Atlas Shrugged strikes a lot of nerves too, though I would say it strikes nerves that don't favor social justice and is also poorly written.
I don't understand why a lot of people go gaga over Catcher in the Rye. I was bored to tears. All Holden did was babble about nonsense the whole time. None of it was important.
Nothing really happened.
What's the point?
And I swear if he said "And all" one more damn time. >.<
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...
Don't think this is another coming of age story. Salinger was embeding his thoughts about WW2.