Did anyone else just not "get" this book? Showing 151-200 of 1,174

[Oleksiy]

I'm not American, not even a native speaker but I didn't get that crap either. It's just a narrative (not a nice one) of a teenager and so what? What's the meaning of the whole book/plot? So much fuzz about The Catcher was the only reason I struggled to finish it.

[Signe]

Faye wrote: "I guess its controversial because of the last part.The unspoken revelation about how the Kindness of one person turn out to be Malicious."

faye, it's been awhile ... are you referring to the part about how the teacher who supports him comes on to him, or something else?

i was discussing the above with a friend who clarified for me that the teacher wasn't really being sexually inappropriate, but that holden, in his disillusionment about nearly everything, interpreted it as such. my friends' view of it made more sense and was consistent with holden's confused, duplicitous character.

[Faye]

Oleksiy wrote: "I'm not American, not even a native speaker but I didn't get that crap either. It's just a narrative (not a nice one) of a teenager and so what? What's the meaning of the whole book/plot? So much..."

---

I think the significance of the book is the character "HOLDEN" completely mirrored what most of the teenager his age is feeling..He voiced out some of the issues in high school that others just live by with sarcasm and he got a point..

[[deleted user]]

I didn't get it at all

[Faye]

Liisa Priyanka wrote: "Faye wrote: "I guess its controversial because of the last part.The unspoken revelation about how the Kindness of one person turn out to be Malicious."

faye, it's been awhile ... are you referring..."

-------

sorry...i didn't see that part...but i guess we have different interpretation...

[Brad]

I absolutely loved this book and can't help but judge all of you who say you didn't "get" it. If you didn't get it then the book was probably making fun of you.

[Lorene]

To quote Too Much Joy - "people he'd despise say 'I feel like this guy.'" I liked it because it feels like an outsider perspective, and I could relate to that. He is the only "real" person, everyone else is a "phony." Of course, when rereading it as an adult I realized that he's every bit as phony as the phonies he despises.

[V.]

Brad wrote: "I absolutely loved this book and can't help but judge all of you who say you didn't "get" it. If you didn't get it then the book was probably making fun of you."

I think that's an unnecessarily narrow way to view literary interpretation. Is any criticism of Catcher in the Rye therefore invalid, because the critic is therefore one of the 'phonies' Holden so despises? Surely, not!

Readers should be able to express a personal preference either in favour or opposed to Salinger's world view without public judgment from someone such as yourself. It's a decent book, perhaps even a great book, but it's certainly not 'gospel' and will inevitably contain flaws. For some those flaws be will deemed important enough to disrupt their enjoyment of it- there's no reason to imply those of us who don't value the novel as much as yourself are philistines.

[Brad]

Victoria wrote: "I think that's an unnecessarily narrow way to view literary interpretation."

I'm not saying EVERY criticism is invalid. Maybe someone didn't like the stream of consciousness style, maybe people haven't experienced Holden's version of a dark place. For someone to say "I just don't "get" it" is downright ignorant because of J.D. Salinger's near perfect portrayal of this character.

You've obviously never met a Catcher in the Rye fan if you think it isn't Gospel. If someone can't appreciate it then I'm automatically wondering what is wrong with them?

[Richard]

Brad wrote: "Victoria wrote: "I think that's an unnecessarily narrow way to view literary interpretation."

I'm not saying EVERY criticism is invalid. Maybe someone didn't like the stream of consciousness styl..."

your kidding right holden is a whiny little bastard the only person or charcter more annoying the him is the pope. all the little bastard does is complain about everything in life, he has no idea life is so much worse if all you do is complain

[Brad]

Richard wrote: "the pope"
What?

[V.]

Brad wrote: "...Salinger's near perfect portrayal of this character"

This is exactly the kind of disagreement I mean:

I actually think that the characterisation, while having many admirable aspects, is ultimately what lets the book down- for me. Yes, Holden is an exposition of the teenage interior in a way that is genuine; yes, it was groundbreaking; yes, Salinger captures the disillusionment and anxieties of a generation (or at least a sizable proportion of it). And that's all very interesting, but when I read the book, I just couldn't find enough that was worthy, or redeeming, in him to make any kind of meaningful emotional connection to the character. His completely unrelenting myopia and frequent lack of self-awareness totally alienated me, and there was very little progression from that starting point. Right at the very end, when he was with Phoebe, I was starting to tip more in his favor, but the other 4/5ths of sympathetic estrangement from the protagonist meant that I was still left feeling pretty cold by the last page.

I thought the themes of the novel were great, but Salinger's failure to be a little more even handed in exploring the multiple facets of Holden's character is what leads me think, 'It was ok, it was decent, but it's never going to be a favourite of mine'. I suppose you could say I just don't 'get' why so many people see him as a great literary anti-hero.

So what I am trying to say (in a very long-winded way! : ) ), is that valuing this book is an area where reasonable minds can differ. Disagreement over Holden's character, or the overall book doesn't mean one of the parties must therefore be ignorant.

[Brad]

Victoria wrote: "I just couldn't find enough that was worthy, or redeeming, in him to make any kind of meaningful emotional connection to the character."

So you feel estrangement and I feel immediate kinship with the protagonist, unlike I've felt in any other book, movie, or anything. I guess I'm unwilling to admit it's a failing of the book and would rather say you're not the intended audience.

[Richard]

Brad wrote: "Richard wrote: "the pope"

the pope is the most annoying sumbitch on the damn planet hes like a 80 year old virgin who can never be wrong, if he says taday that the 4 + 4 = 10 then it's true

[Debra]

During one of my summer vacations, I'm an elementary school teacher, I decided to go to the book store and buy myself some of the classics and read them. I've always heard about the Catcher in the Rye and so it was one of the books on my list. To make a long story short..I didn't get it!! In addition, I have noticed many people who have committed a crazy act have said they somehow related to the main character in this story.
So maybe that's the problem? Maybe I'm too normal and that's why I didn't get the insight into Holden? Or maybe it's because I was older when I read it. Nevertheless, I didn't enjoy reading it as much as others.

[Corilla]

Paul 'Pezter' wrote: "I don't think my lack of connection to the book is to do with any dislike of Holden - in fact it constantly amazes me that so many people here on GR seem to base their reviews on whether or not the..."

I wasn't going to comment on this thread, but this is very odd. I love Catcher in the Rye. I have a CITR sweatshirt and I have read the novel three times, as well as all of Salinger's other books. You're right, I totally hated The Great Gatsby! I do like a few of the short stories, but for the most part am not too interested in Fitzgerald. It must be a personal preference. They're both a comment on times in an existential sort of reflection.
Also if you aren't a fan of Catcher in the Rye, I doubt you will care for Franny and Zooey too much. It's much of the same, though you never know!

[Vanessa]

i didnt get this book at all def not as good as i was told

[Corilla]

This book was written in the 51 and takes place in the 40's, so it's not quite the bell bottoms and burning-bra era yet.

[Corilla]

It was written in a different time. Teen angst and alienation were not common themes as they are today. It was an original theme that explored deeply provactive areas of life that weren't talked about in the 40's. People didn't go to psychatrists for depression or have ready access to support groups. It was one of the first of it's kind that spoke about death, disfunction, and feeling directionless in a time when the pressures to conform to the "American Dream," were reaching it's peak. To rebell against that had a much deeper impact then. Holden had a deep desire to do something great with his life, but was unable to connect with that as a reality until the end when he finds the purpose to his life. That's the point.

On a literary standpoint the structure and form of his composition is beautifully put together. Every sentence constructed deliberately. This isn't a book that can be read through hastily. Much of the character developement and relationship dynamic is in the sub-text and took me, sometimes a couple reads, to understand the deeper implications, also because the vast social differences in speech and behaviors from current time.

[U.L.]

I find this thread very interesting. I read Catcher in the Rye when I was about 25, maybe 24. For a while I was like, what is all the hype. It's just not that good. But I must say that about half way through it there was something in between the lines that I connected with and to this day, I just don't know why exactly. It's not a great novel as far as characters and story and empathy. It's okay for that but it's not technically great. But there is something emotionally tangible, somehow. So I can't defend it, but I am a proponent to it.

Oh, and Gatsby is horrible, period. Tried. I might have to start a thread about it. The story taking place through the eyes of Nick I think is only distracting from the actual story. From there it's only frustrating. Just don't get it.

[Corilla]

U.L. wrote: "I find this thread very interesting. I read Catcher in the Rye when I was about 25, maybe 24. For a while I was like, what is all the hype. It's just not that good. But I must say that about half w..."

That is a good observation. Come to think of it, I would have enjoyed ',Great Gatsby' more had it been written from a different character's perspective. It was extremely frustrating that all the action was happening next door and the reader only see glimpses. Reminds me a little of 'Breakfast at Tiffanys,' but with less prostitution and homosexuality.

[Corilla]

Just for the record, I loved the novella,'Breakfast at Tiffanys.' Not knocking it at all.

[U.L.]

I think I need to read breakfast at Tiffany's

[Jemma]

At last someone (several someones in fact) have said the emperor has no clothes. Hurrah!

[Humaira]

me neither. my friend recommended this book as a 'book you must read before you die'. when i read it...well.. i dont get it. i cant even finish it and ended up reading the synopsis on wikipedia.

[Shawn]

I think part of the power of this book, was not only that it was from a teen's perspective, but that it was from a severely depressed teen's perspective. Mental illness was not discussed (it barely is today) and to be inside the head of someone who is stuck in those thought patterns was monumental. Holden is the ultimate 'unreliable narrator.' More than that, for anyone with strong mental health, he's insufferable.

For what it's worth, I'm not particularly fond of the book, but I can see the value of studying it. It is a brilliantly accurate view of a very slow spin out of control. He's desperately grabbing for life lines, for connections to people, but no one can help. Considering the number of kids battling depression (and yes, many of them are the ones self-medicating in the smoke pit) it is relevant to a lot of my students.

If you 'didn't get it,' be thankful for your mental health.

[Corilla]

Shawn wrote: "I think part of the power of this book, was not only that it was from a teen's perspective, but that it was from a severely depressed teen's perspective. Mental illness was not discussed (it barely..."

I loved your response, good insight.

[Douglas]

I read it when I was 12(1976) and it really "spoke to me". I don't think it would be as well received by teens today and I can understand why adults "don't really get it". I doubt I would if I read it for the first time today.
When it came out it broke all the rules. To be appreciated, the reader would have to understand the norm at that time.

[Paul]

For me, nothing interesting happens in this book. I finished the book still expecting something to happen. I was even tempted to re-read it to see if I missed a couple of pages somewhere that would make it all worthwhile, but I didn't, and I'm glad I didn't re-read it.

Waste of time. Lot of hype.

[Joanne]

I read this book many, many years ago when it was still considered a controversial book and hyped quite a bit. I was much younger then and my sympathies should have been with the young character according to the popular theory: Instead, I found him to be obnoxious and puerile and the book to be one long whine. I still cannot understand why this poor example should be "required" reading for many students.

[Mochaspresso]

Joanne wrote: "I read this book many, many years ago when it was still considered a controversial book and hyped quite a bit. I was much younger then and my sympathies should have been with the young character ac..."

He's actually a pretty good study if you want to teach about character traits, motivations, character development in literature etc.

[Hiba]

Interesting article about books, including The catcher in the rye.

http://asolitarypassion.blogspot.com/...

[nobody]

Operacija wrote: "This book is considered a classic because up until that book, novels (traditional novels) had a different narrator - an objective narrator who knows all the facts about all the characters. Catcher ..."
Yes, Holden is an Unreliable Narrator, and an early example of such. Jim Thompson also used them around the same time period, at least as early as 1952's The Killer Inside Me.

[Raz]

I didnt get this book at all when i first read it.

but its just about a teenager being a teenager, talking about teenage things in the teenage tone.

[Moulee]

oh come on...it was funny, deep, painful, sentimental, vulgar, sweet, naive, dirty, poetic and epic all at the same time..re-read it until you get it...

[Susan]

Jodie wrote: "I am curious to see if many Australians "got this book" my guess is not a lot of them did, perhaps it is an American classic because it speaks to American teenagers but it seems so far removed from..."

I know this post is a few months old but had to comment. I'm an Aussie who didn't like this book. But I don't think that this is specifically an 'American' book. I think it may resonate a little more with New Yorkers because of the scenery, but the essence of the book is about the disconnect of being a teenager, which I think most teenagers (at least in the Western world) can relate to. I've heard repeatedly that if you didn't like this book, it's because you didn't 'get' it. Well, I think I 'got' it, but I still didn't like it. I want to string Holden Caulfield up in front of a bunch of teenagers and say this is how NOT to do it.

[Raz]

Moulee wrote: "oh come on...it was funny, deep, painful, sentimental, epic, vulgar, sweet, naive, dirty, poetic and epic all at the same time..re-read it until you get it..."


It has become my favorite book of all time now. I read it when I was 12 not knowing the craziness that would unfold when i became a full fledged teenager, I read it when I was 15 and cried because I was like THANK YOU!!! SOMEONE UNDERSTANDS ME.
I read it when I was 18 with my class, and I hated everyone in my class afterwards and the teacher for just reading it and skipping through it like it wasn't important.

[Marcela]

I think sometimes you need to look at the time period a book is published and see what the author may have been trying to say in terms of current social norms of that time. I think this book came out in the 50's? I believe the 50s was a period of "repression", and depression was a stigma, much more than it is now. Holden is disconnected and struggling to find "his place" in society, and in the end, he has a nervous breakdown.

I think at the time this book came out, as well as TODAY even, some people come away with "wow, Im not the only person who feels that way." And on some basic human level...we all need to be reminded of that from time to time.

[Heather]

I read this book in high school and I remember liking it but not much else. I couldn't of liked it too much if it didn't stick with me though. Or maybe I just didn't read it enough for it to stick with me.

[Sharon]

The main character seemed severly depressed and I kept fearing he would kill himself.

[Moulee]

Raz wrote: "Moulee wrote: "oh come on...it was funny, deep, painful, sentimental, epic, vulgar, sweet, naive, dirty, poetic and epic all at the same time..re-read it until you get it..."


It has become my fav..."
its amazing..one cant possibly not like it!!!:)

[Florianne]

I did not get it, until my English teacher explain it to me.

[John]

When I first read it I just did not get it. I re-read it last year (20 years later) and I loved it.

[Nora]

I didn't get it either, Why is it such a classic? A friend of mind told me it was great, one of her favourites, but I honestly almost didn't finish it! Not only did I fail to conect with the characters, but I also failed to become interested.

[Betty]

I too never did get this book. I grew up in Tennessee and had to read it. I loved most of the books that were required reading for school, but not this one. It was soooo boring!

[Majdz]

I still donkt know what to think about this book. Heard it was a classic so I got it and read it and after that I was like: "and now what?". There were some passages in the book I really liked and used them as quotes, but in general it's not a book I can say I totally loved. Its ok.

[Ian]

I am so glad I found this thread. When I finished the book, about ten years ago, I just thought 'what was the point of that?' It wasn't even a good story. I felt I had wasted my time reading it.

[Jason]

I got it. Holden is an irritating, self-righteous young adult who thinks he is immortal. Most people dislike the book because the main character really doesn't "change" much, even though circumstances in his life should change him. But I think it is Salinger's honest depiction of a frustrating youth that makes the book so impressive. How many people do you know, young or old, who are so disillusioned and negative and no matter what happens, their glass is always half empty. It is tragic that Holden's little sister seems to be more insightful and empathetic (and in some ways, more intelligent) than he is.

But Holden is not without hope. My favorite scene in the book is when he notices the various "F--- you" graffiti in several places. At first, it doesn't bother him. He even thinks it's funny. But when he spots it at his sister's school, he is angry and comments on how no place is sacred:

That's the whole trouble. You can't ever find a place that's nice and peaceful, because there isn't any. You may think there is, but once you get there, when you're not looking, somebody'll sneak up and write "F--- you" right under your nose. Try it sometime. I think, even, if I ever die, and they stick me in a cemetery, and I have a tombstone and all, it'll say "Holden Caulfield" on it, and then what year I was born and what year I died, and then right under that it'll say "F--- you." I'm positive, in fact.

Those rare moments of insight and clarity don't happen to people like Holden often in real life and I think that's what leads most people to either love the book or hate it.

[Cherei]

It was relevant for the decade that it was published.. but, what was "shocking" then.. today.. HA.. not even close! lol

[[deleted user]]

I am from Romania,so I read the translated version.Maybe this was the problem,because the book didn't seem very interesting and original.Many characters of romanian literature are like Salinger's hero,pretentious and cheeky.But isn't every teenager thinking of being smarter than everyone else and misunderstood?

There are many opinions regarding this book and you can argue all day long whether it is good or bad.This is the beauty of literature.Even if it's not one of my favorites I would still recommend it.

I'll try to find the book in english.