The Catcher in the Rye
discussion
What is the Purpose of Holden's Lying?
date
newest »
newest »
The scene does more than simply show the lying. It gives us excellent insight into the sort of boys at Pencey that Holden despises. This becomes an important psychological foundation once we understand the James Castle incident in the all-important Chapter 22. Further, it gives us an indication of Holden's utter confusion of feelings around women. I think he lies not simply to kid her, but to please her. You give him much too much credit if you think Holden gleefully anticipates the lie about Earnest later being figured out. In fact, he says something to the contrary when he states that Mrs. Morrow will now likely always think that her son was a shy fellow almost voted class president. Holden shows the lack of skill he has in lying several times throughout the book, with this being perhaps the biggest example. Once she figures out he is leaving school early, he panics, giving her the absurd excuse of the brain tumor. Although he takes an assumed name with her, he does come to regret that, realizing that he feels drawn to talking to this woman. She becomes the first of many individuals outside Pencey who Holden solicits as a listener and who he fails to make a strong connection with. Interestingly, Holden later compares the nun with the glasses to Mrs. Morrow. Why? Was it that they both were physically appealing to him? Their purity? Their innocence and naivete?
I don't see this as a throw away scene at all; it provides us with insight into Holden's character and establishes some groundwork for later scenes to follow.First, Holden is a terrific liar as he tells us. But this lie is different from the lie your colleague told you about the microwave and his pacemaker. Your colleague made you feel troubled, and while perhaps later you bonded over this fib, there was no benefit to you from the lie.
In contrast, Holden lies to Mrs. Morrow, the mother of a jerk at his school, to make her feel better about herself and her son. I believe the motivation here is empathy, not cruelty (although one could certainly argue that it also grows out of Holden's developing mental illness), and it is certainly not a self-serving lie.
This conversation and the central lie about Ernest connect to a few ideas that come into the story later--Ernest Morrow is just one more jerk who makes a woman's life miserable (here his mother), and Holden feels tremendous sympathy for women who are preyed on by men (he gives voice to this while he is sitting there later in the novel waiting for Sally Hayes to show up). But even more so, I think Holden feels empathy for her as a mother of a bad kid, and his lie helps her feel just a little better about her son. Holden knows how terribly he has let his own mother down. He'd no doubt appreciate someone telling his mother something positive about him, especially now that he has been removed from his third school. There's no reason to think this lie will ever come out. Mrs. Morrow probably won't think to mention this passing conversation on the train with an acquaintance of her son. But she will feel good about herself and her son for a short while, and that's what Holden is trying to accomplish.
When he meets the ugly women at the Lavender Room, he tells a similar lie. These dumb-dumbs are from out of town at this crappy hotel bar hoping to see celebrities. Holden is savvy enough to know they don't have a chance in hell glimpsing an actor here. But by telling Marty she just missed seeing Gary Cooper, he's giving them exactly what they want. This lie first of all makes Marty sad and Holden feels bad about telling it. But then the lie blossoms into exactly what he told it for in the first place. Marty tells the other two she caught a glimpse of Gary Cooper, and the three are excited and happy and will no doubt go back to Seattle and tell this story again and again.
Now I suppose we could argue that all lies are bad or that in both cases here Holden is lying to aggrandize himself, but I don't think that's the case. Holden is troubled; Holden in both scenes gives himself a different name, a different identity, but the lies grow out of a desire to help people, especially here women who have gained his empathy.
Petergiaquinta wrote: "Holden in both scenes gives himself a different name, a different identity, but the lies grow out of a desire to help people, especially here women who have gained his empathy."This makes sense and is consistent with his behavior elsewhere, such as his fight with Stradlater over Jane Gallagher, toward whom he feels protective.
Perhaps also lying provides Holden a sense of control, something he desperately needs because the world feels so out of control to him. He's lying to Ms. Morrow and to the nightclub women not to exploit them but to make them happy, thereby controlling their perception of reality.
Co-dependents feel responsible for others' happiness. Holden exhibits co-dependency traits by wanting to protect and make others happy.
I had connected the lying with Holden's desire to "kid" girls as expressed in chapter eleven, page 78: "I used to kid her [Jane Gallagher] once in a while because she wouldn't take her kings out of the back row. But I didn't kid her much, though. You never wanted to kid Jane too much. I think I really like it best when you can kid the pants off a girl when the opportunity arises, but it's a funny thing. The girls I like best are the ones I never feel much like kidding. Sometimes I think they'd like it if you kidded them--in fact, I know they would--but it's hard to get started, once you've known them a pretty long time and never kidded them."
He seems to contradict himself ("I like it best when I can kid the pants off a girl" vs "The girls I like best are the ones I never feel much like kidding."), but if you read carefully, there is a distinction. Girls he likes best are ones in which he feels emotionally invested, therefore protective toward. Other girls are free game for kidding.
He doesn't give examples of what he means by kidding; so I thought lying was for him a form of kidding.
"...it provides us with insight into Holden's character..."
We agree that it serves as characterization. I meant "throwaway" in the sense that it doesn't move the plot, such as it is, forward. It just makes use of the time while the train is moving, using it for characterization.
Ah, here's Martin again with his rapier wit and laser-like literary analysis!
There's another type of lying on Holden's part, however. It's a form of lying that isn't done to help others, like with Mrs. Morrow or the three women from out of town, or to cover himself (such as telling Mrs. Morrow he has to have an operation or he will be going to South America with his grandmother). It's the lying he admits to on page 16 when he says, "It's awful. If I'm on my way to the store to buy a magazine even, and somebody asks me where I'm going, I'm liable to say I'm going to the opera. It's terrible." We don't see Holden engaged in this form of lying (even the lie he tells there to Spencer is more of the evasive kind--he feels uncomfortable and needs to get out of that room), but if he tells us this, it must be a problem for him. And this is a very different matter. Possibly one could in fact call Holden a "douche" here. I knew a girl in high school like this, and on a few occasions I have had students like this, too, terrible, pathetic, pathological liars who lied about trivial matters that didn't even need to be talked about, let alone lied about. But here's where I think you're onto it, Monty. That form of pathological lying may give the liar a sense of control over the world when he or she feels utterly powerless in the world. And this seems to describe Holden. However, can you think of anywhere in the book where he engages in these sorts of out-and-out pathological lies?
Martin wrote: "Petergiaquinta wrote: "Ah, here's Martin again with his rapier wit and laser-like literary analysis!"It's just my opinion. As valid as anyone's."
Agreed these are all opinions.
Martin wrote: "Because he's a douche."Great post. You summed up all his issues with a one liner.
All opinions are not equally valid. Sheesh, what kind of lame, pathetic worldview you have. An opinion about Salinger or Holden from a professor of Twentieth Century American lit is certainly more valid than a mouth-breathing moron's or an insane person's or a kid's. If Harold Bloom drops in to share a few bon mots with us about Catcher, his opinion would immediately become more valid than all of ours put together. So let's not kid ourselves about the equal validity of opinions. And an "opinion" about a work of literature pulled out of one's ass with no textual support is no opinion at all. Here's an "opinion" for you: stop posting until you have something interesting or meaningful to share...
Petergiaquinta wrote: An opinion about Salinger or Holden from a professor of Twentieth Century American lit is certainly more valid I would certainly be interested in hearing it, but I would not necessarily consider it a universal truth. There are going to be differences of opinion among the scholars as well, and some of them are likely to resent anyone questioning their views.
Monty J wrote: "Starting on page 54, Holden concocts an elaborate lie--running four and-a-half pages--on the train with the mother of Earnest Morrow, one of his classmates. Holden seems to enjoy pulling her leg an..."I loved this scene! I thought it was hilarious, and I'm keen to do something like it, maybe with a customer at work :p which brings me to say, I lie my un-caring butt off when I talk to customers at work. I hate working at a supermarket more than I hate school. Lying to people you don't know is so much fun - that's why I do it. But I think for Holden, it was a kind of safety net. He didn't need to explain himself kind of thing.
I just went and reread that section. A few things leapt out at me. Here's an overwrought analysis:First, the spelling of the character's name is "Ernest" not "Earnest." It's a homophone, of course, so it's easy to mistake, and I have no doubt that is why Salinger chose that name for that particular character. (More on that in a bit.)
Second, I don't think she believes him. She is, after all, an adult and he's a 16-17 year old kid. She's attractive and charming. She's wearing a lot of jewelry, indicating she's either well off herself and/or has married well. She's probably not unfamiliar with young men lying to her... and he's clearly hitting on her. Part of the purpose of that section is to tell us about Holden's attitude towards women, and his mistaken impression about his own appeal to them. He's attempting to be suave, but even after his complimenting her son (Holden isn't sure she believes him, but he thinks she might for reasons that are all covered in Freudian implications) she picks up a copy of Vogue (not an accident that Salinger has her read that particular magazine) and reads it rather than speak to him more. To an objective, but more worldly viewer, it's obvious that though he thinks he's fooled her, she's well out of his league. Throughout the novel, Holden's lies and deceptions are caught out.
Third, one should always pay close attention to the names of characters in any piece of literature. Authors often give us hints about what is going on based on the history or etymology of those names. The name Holden Caufield is itself rich with history, homonym and homophone relationships... but that's a whole different thread.
With that in mind, the first thing Holden does is lie about his own name. For the purposes of that scene he's "Rudolf Schmidt" the name of a janitor. Rudolf means "famous wolf" and I'm confident Salinger was aware of that, and making a joke. "Wolf" is also a term used popularly at the time for a man who chases women, most comparable to the use of the word "dog" these days for a similar type of person. "Famous" is ironic because he's lying to her in order to protect his identity. Schmidt, of course, is not only a very common name, Smith in English, but it derives from metalworking. He's going to hit on her and fabricate a whole elaborate story in doing so....
"Ernest Morrow" is an interesting name for such a throw-away character in a relatively insignificant (plot-wise) and unconnected scene. As I'm sure most folks will know, Oscar Wilde used the name in his play (using the homonym "Earnest" in the title and "Ernest" for the deception of the character, Worthing) but the obvious homonym with "earnest" as in "sincere" tells us why both authors used that name. Wilde expresses the pun outright, but Salinger is using it more subtlety. Similarly, Morrow as in "tomorrow" or more generally and poetically: the future. Further, Holden refers to him as "old Ernie" throughout the piece, hinting at a relationship to the future.
Fourth, we have to consider the lies that he tells Mrs. Morrow about her son. They are all about popularity, approval and responsibility, arguably one of the major themes of the book. They have no meaningful connection to the real Ernest Morrow who is something of a cad and a sadist, "snapping his soggy old wet towel at people's asses." (Some sexual connotations there.... The "pervert" issue will arise again later.)
In essence, by naming the character Ernest Morrow, and having an encounter with that character's mother spark this "fabrication" of popularity and approval, Salinger is saying that these are Holden's dreams for the future.
And, at the end of the conversation, he makes up a life-threatening tumor for himself, putting on a brave face. This fabricated person, Rudolf Schmidt, is dying. Who will replace him?
So, thematically, Holden is spinning a yarn to amuse himself, maybe he's flattering and bemusing Mrs. Morrow, but it is revelatory of his psychology and the theme of the book; he's also describing a fantasy of how he wants to be perceived, embraced and accepted. It foreshadows the conclusion of the novel and its title.
Gary wrote: "Schmidt, of course, is not only a very common name, Smith in English, but it derives from metalworking. He's going to hit on her and fabricate a whole elaborate story in doing so...."Nice...and you'll that notice his next "alias" picks up right where he left off: "Jim Steele," an even greater fantasy role, almost one of those Hollywood he-man movie stars he despises and yet is drawn to at the same time. Gary Cooper, anyone?
Jim Steele. Hilarious. There's a porn name if ever there was one....
I remember a time when I was in 8th or 9th grade and my friends and I used to do the same kind of thing Holden did. It didn't last very long, but we enjoyed it. It was pretty much the same kind of thing that Emma is talking about. We were all good kids and didn't hurt anyone by what we said. It was just nonsense.I'm trying to get back into my 13 or 14 year old brain and see if I can analyse it. First, I think we did it because it was like trying on an identity. One of my favorites was just like the Brady Bunch, and this was long before the show. "My folks were divorced and my dad took the 3 boys and my mom took the 3 girls. I missed my brothers...bla, bla,bla" Another favorite was to pretend I was from Georgia. I have no idea why I wanted to be from Georgia. I think I just thought it was more interesting than my everyday normal Virginia family. It was almost like a teen version of "let's pretend."
I think the second reason was that we had a sense of power. We could create a "reality" out of our imaginations. It was kind of a heady power where we weren't ordinary middle class kids, but that we could pick someone to be and change reality for another person. It's hard to explain that, but it is the same way Holden creates a persona with Mrs. Morrow. She might go home and tell her husband about what an interesting kid she met on the train and it would be her reality even though it was Holden's imagination. Actually, it was exactly the same thing as being a writer.
The third reason is easy. We were just bored and wanted to spice things up a bit. It is exactly as Emma said, just playing games.
Sometimes I would lie to my mother when I felt like she intruded too much into my private space. This one was a real razor edge thing. I would never lie about something important because...well, it was a LIE and I was not a liar. I remember one time she asked me where I got a box of stationary which I had bought and I said my friend gave it to me. She eventually found out I bought it and asked me why in the world I said Gerrie gave it to me. I finally said I didn't know...I just wanted to keep it to myself. She must have understood my desire for privacy because she didn't do anything and let up on asking me about personal things. In the same way, I can see Holden not really knowing why he was doing things and being asked too many questions that he didn't have answers for and didn't want to discuss. He could be a different person and the answers he came up with couldn't touch him because they weren't about him.
As for Holden, I also think he felt empowered by being able to create a better image of Mrs. Morrow's son. It was as if he could reach into her reality and give her a better son. His life was so out of control and for a little while he could create a different world and nothing in it could hurt him because it wasn't real.
So now you know my secret past. Hopefully it adds a little dimension to Holden's actions. I am sure if I went to a psychiatrist he or she would have all sorts of other things to say, but it never seemed like any more than play acting done by young girls who had too much imagination and nothing for it to light on.
Gary wrote: "Jim Steele. Hilarious. There's a porn name if ever there was one...."He could star in Catch her in the Rear ;)
I think Holden is misunderstood. He's not ridden with teenage angst. He' s not devious or a hero. He is, I believe, a young man grappling with the death of his beloved older brother. He is casting about. He's depressed. He does end up in a mental hospital, a fact often overlooked. Seen through the lens of a depressed young man, many of his actions take on new meaning and the text an entirely, and I think more sympathetic, tone. Give it a try. It worked for me. Holden's journey is a struggle to regain his footing. He can be forgiven for lying. Or running off to New York. Or for leaving Pency Prep. He's a young man in search of some inner peace, in search of himself in a world that no longer contains his brother. What do you think?
In some ways wasn't it J.D. Salinger warning us that Holden didn't believe everything that Holden was saying? By admitting that he's an awful liar isn't it a bit like the opening of Moby-Dick "Call me Ishmael." The guy doesn't say his name is really Ishmael, he's just asking you to believe a story. For your "willing suspension of disbelief"
It's almost a literary trope. Wuthering Heights and Frankenstein are also not experienced first-hand; just related through narrators of questionable/suspect integrity.
MontyI suspect that the origin of many practical jokes resides with the Irish. When visiting there, I was the butt of several, more common than in my Beantown home. But, yes, in Boston, with its high Irish population, is home to much leg pulling. When I moved South, I failed to experience it.
The unreliable narrator has been a standard since Don Quxiote which told by - a guy reading a manuscript that he found in a pile, about himself with editorial comment thrown in from two editors - or something like that. Short: don't trust the narrator. All writing is fiction. It's somebody's version of what happened no matter how you slice it. Believe half of what you see, son, and noen of what you hear...
There's a bit of it here in eastern Tennessee, Geoffrey, and along the southern Appalachian area, especially through eastern Kentucky. But those are areas that were originally heavily settled by the Irish. You can see the lineage in much of the music that comes down from the mountains, the dancing, storytelling, whiskey making; there's even some vestigial brogue when you get back in some of the more remote hollers. I've not been in the upper Appalachian regions, but I suspect there is some similarity. I do know there is up as far as West Virginia.
Renee wrote: "There's a bit of it here in eastern Tennessee, Geoffrey, and along the southern Appalachian area, especially through eastern Kentucky. But those are areas that were originally heavily settled by the Irish."How true.
When I wore a younger man's clothes and was single I visited Chattanooga on business. Heading toward the airport, the marquee over a nightclub read: "Hotpants Contest Tonight." I hit the brakes, did a U-turn and parked.
Inside was a slice of heaven--pool and snooker tables, Kentucky bourbon, and a steady stream of blue-eyed, brown-haired beauties. Not a blonde or a black-haired girl in the bunch. Almost missed my flight. I later read a National Geographic article about how the area had been settled by Irish. "Damn straight," I thought. One of my sweetest memories of youth.
One of the ways I choose new authors to read is I look for names of Celt origins. Storytelling is in the blood. i've seldom been disappointed.
Stephen wrote: "I think Holden is misunderstood. He's not ridden with teenage angst. He' s not devious or a hero. He is, I believe, a young man grappling with the death of his beloved older brother. He is casting ..."Allie was Holden's younger brother.
Matthew wrote: "Stephen wrote: "I think Holden is misunderstood. He's not ridden with teenage angst. He' s not devious or a hero. He is, I believe, a young man grappling with the death of his beloved older brother..."Oh I didn't even catch that, you are right of course
Edward wrote: "I've been curious a while. Is sarcasm an objectionable patois outside of NJ and NY?"In a word, "yep." Or at least puzzling.
In my experience, people in the South and Midwest to be more prone to what they consider "straight talk." "Say what you mean and mean what you say," is a common aphorism.
Oblique references and sarcasm are bound to cause mistrust and/or confusion. Not so much in metropolitan areas, but this is the general rule overall.
Monty J wrote: "Edward wrote: "I've been curious a while. Is sarcasm an objectionable patois outside of NJ and NY?"In a word, "yep." Or at least puzzling.
In my experience, people in the South and Midwest to b..."
Does this mean you don't like us in the Northeast Monty? : (
Though I know what you mean- I like straight talk and that's what I do- I only use sarcasm when I KNOW that I can and it's okay. I hope most of it is intended to break the ice, although I have never been to the other coast, I lived in Michigan when I was a kid so I don't remember.
Karen wrote: "Does this mean you don't like us in the Northeast Monty? : ("Gosh no. On the contrary. I have very much enjoyed my visits East. It's just a different way of communicating.
In the South, sarcasm can be really cruel and veiled.
For example, "Bless your little heart" can be an insult or a genuine expression of sympathy depending on the accompanying inflection and facial expression.
Now I understand what I was doing in telling stories. First, there is the pulling your leg aspect, I could tell you a hundred examples of things my Mississippi family has done. And then there is the story telling. We love telling stories beginning with , and sometimes ending with "Now you young folks...." Storytelling on the front or back porch fills my memories. When I lived for a short time north of Detroit I went to an antiques sale. I found the wicker furniture I was looking for and then tried to get some help. A salesman with upholstery fabric was talking with the proprietor about how long it took him in the South because the people wanted to talk and talk and look at all the samples, and drink iced tea. The owner was telling how tiresome it was to have southern buyer because they they had to talk about everything etc. They went on and on having a good old time at the expense of people whose way of life was different and just flat ignoring me.
Now, I was the only buyer and I had come pretty close to them trying to get someone to notice me so I could get some help. What I was looking at would have been about $750. After 10 minutes, I took my little red Thunderbird with the "I Love Dixie" front plates and left. By that time I wouldn't have bought anything anyway. I wanted, in the worst way, to say that in the South, we did enjoy conversation and visiting with people and we durn sure had enough manners to greet everyone who came to our house and store and make them feel welcome. Grrr..that still gets me riled. Sorry, if you are from Detroit, Karen. I met some wonderful people in Romeo, MI, but these weren't some of them. :>(
Monty J wrote: In the South, sarcasm can be really cruel and veiled.For example, "Bless your little heart" can be an insult or a genuine expression of sympathy depending on the accompanying inflection and facial expression.
"
That is so true. Much as I love the South, I have to admit it does have faults and this is one. But then, there is the rural South and the plantation South and they are very different.
Monty J wrote: "Karen wrote: "Does this mean you don't like us in the Northeast Monty? : ("Gosh no. On the contrary. I have very much enjoyed my visits East. It's just a different way of communicating.
In the S..."
I knew that! I was teasing you.
Anne Hawn wrote: "Now I understand what I was doing in telling stories. First, there is the pulling your leg aspect, I could tell you a hundred examples of things my Mississippi family has done. And then there is ..."My husband, a Bostonian- he is 62, doesn't want to go down south because he thinks the people are too friendly! Lol. I'm going to get to New Orleans some how.
Edward wrote: "Petergiaquinta wrote: "All opinions are not equally valid. Sheesh, what kind of lame, pathetic worldview you have. An opinion about Salinger or Holden from a professor of Twentieth Century American...Meaningful to who? Deference to The Grand Inquisitor? **** that. "Well, aren't you radical?
You don't recognize that a prof who has dedicated his lifetime to the study of an author or a period doesn't have insight well beyond your pedestrian understanding of the same subject?
You don't go to a doctor when you're sick? You don't call a plumber when you need one?
Well done, sir! Who needs authority or expertise in this world of ours!
Edward wrote: "We pedestrian radicals are numerous. Its far from only me. People are unimpressed and disgusted. They are now able to "educate" themselves on the internet. As a matter of fact I don't go to the doctor when I'm sick and have miraculously survived."Good luck with that approach. If that's even true, I imagine eventually in life you're going to need (and be grateful for) a good internist or surgeon who really knows the craft.
As for me, I value expertise and a lifetime of learning and experience. I go to the doctor, call the plumber, and take my car into the mechanic when it needs it. And I read lit crit and value the opinions and positions of those academics and critics far more than I do my own and those of my fellow GoodReaders.
You might have noticed here at GoodReads, what can happen when authority and expertise are ignored. Ridiculousness is often the result. (How about 2011? Divergent is voted the best book of the year!)
The day of the expert is never over. And monkeys typing for eternity don't write Hamlet, either. They just keep getting poop on the keys over and over and over...
Even if, 25 years later, you question the long-term efficacy of your brain surgeon, I for one am glad you went to the expert instead of making it a DIY project. I doubt we'd be having this conversation today if you had.
: ) Hang in there Edward.
all discussions on this book
|
post a new topic
Frankenstein (other topics)
Moby-Dick or, The Whale (other topics)
The Catcher in the Rye (other topics)
Books mentioned in this topic
Wuthering Heights (other topics)Frankenstein (other topics)
Moby-Dick or, The Whale (other topics)
The Catcher in the Rye (other topics)
It's a throwaway scene, having nothing to do with Holden's predicament; so all it does is provide insight into Holden's character and social morays.
Holden, p. 59: "Then I started to read the timetable I had in my pocket. Just to stop lying. Once I get started, I can go for hours if I feel like it. No kidding. Hours."
Someone from New York or the Northeast chime in here.
It has been my experience that there is a regional custom of "kidding" among you, where elaborate lies are concocted and passed around as a form of harmless teasing. With some, it's an intellectual pastime, like punning, to see how many people they can trick and who catches on fastest. I had a guy working for me from Massachusetts who did this relentlessly.
I announced we were installing a microwave oven in the break room. "It has to be at least 100 feet from my desk," he said. "Why?" I said. "It can cause my pacemaker to malfunction." "Really?" I said with a worried face. The liar started laughing. This kind of stuff.
It drove me nuts until I got used to it. Then I caught on and started pulling the same kind of stuff with him. It was a bonding thing. Made the time at work more interesting.
I am wondering if something like this is what Holden was referring too when he said he was a big liar.
Growing up in Texas we did something similar on a much smaller scale. I get the feeling it is done on a larger scale in the Northeast to test the gullibility of strangers and impress and entertain with one's ingenuity in craftsmanship. (In my 30+ years in California, I have yet to experience this curious social phenomenon.)
In terms of character arc, this lying scene could be seen as Holden's apex. He demonstrates maximum self-confidence here. The rest of the book is downhill for him. He has moments of modest recovery, but most of the scenes that follow show him on a downward slide toward his eventual nervous collapse.
So what do you think? Why did Salinger devote so much ink to a throwaway scene about Holden's lying?