The Catcher in the Rye
discussion
Did anyone else just not "get" this book?
Teatime wrote: "This may be my favorite book of all time. It's about love of a dead brother and how the family cannot get past his death. It's about a boy who wants to wipe out all the profanity in the world so th..."Well said. Thank you.
Just because you dislike Holden does not necessarily mean you hate the book.
i am 36 and first read it at 25. as an american gen Xer, i totally get it. maybe it depends on country, maybe it depends on generation, maybe it depends on how you were raised. i related.
I thought it was interesting - but I did struggle with it; mainly because I had to concentrate so hard on understanding it. A lot of the teen lingo from that era is hard to understand - and being Australian made it harder. I vaguely 'got it'.
...But I can't tell you what a catcher in the rye is.
Stockwell wrote: "I read it to see what all the fuss was about and I still have no idea. All I got out of it was a teenager whining about his life and college and girls and how everything sucks. I don't understand w..."On the anniversary of its publication, I remember reading a columnist saying much the same thing - that it's about a self-absorbed teenager.
But what it's really about is a kid who is mourning his brother's death, and doesn't have the words or understanding to talk about it.
There is actually an incredible taboo on talking about or understanding grief, mourning and death in North America, and this book takes a look at it through a boy's eyes just as he is on the edge of adulthood.
It was also have been the experience for millions of people who lost brothers in the Second World War, but who were expected to just get back to life as usual, when life was no longer usual, and when you are suffering from that kind of grief, it drains the joy out of life.
That's my take.
I completely know what you mean! I didn't get it, I kind of liked it but I don't know why! I thought the main character really whiney and didn't like him at all! My mum really likes this book, it is her favourite and I can't see why!
I absolutely HATED this book. I don't think it has anything to do with the fact that it was published so long ago, because I read The Outsiders by S.E. Hinton in middle school and absolutely loved it, and that book was written quite a long time ago as well. I found Holden to be nothing but annoying, and I didn't even finish the whole book because I just couldn't read it any longer. You're not the only one who just didn't get this book.
same here.. i didnt get the whole point of the story. it's just all about teenage rants and rebellion.i find it boring especially how the story ended. :|
Stockwell wrote: "I read it to see what all the fuss was about and I still have no idea. All I got out of it was a teenager whining about his life and college and girls and how everything sucks. I don't understand w..."I read this book for class and we thoughts that it was about Holden needing to get help because he obviously needed it since he was always making suicide jokes. It was also about him wanting to keep children from the fall from innocence because he wants to be the catcher in the rye that keeps children from falling off of the big cliff. I think that Holden wants someone to notice something is seriously wrong with him but he doesn't know how to ask for help.
I could be completely wrong though.
Aside from the culturally existential significance -- that we as individuals struggle between our hate for the superficiality and phoniness of the world and our own shameful compliance -- it's important to take note of the deeper spiritual meaning. It was Salinger's character, Buddy Glass, who wrote this story, a spiritual savant, most studied in Zen Buddhism. Buddy Glass, along with most all of the Glass family members, struggles with misanthropy (general distrust/dislike of humanity) as a result of being so deeply conflicted by the inherent beauty of the world and its inhabitants' horrific response. The character Holden emulates this view perfectly. His wish to be a catcher in the rye -- someone who stops the children from crossing the line to adulthood -- is a mercy call at preserving the beauty and innocence of youth. The whole climax might be said to start (and end) with him seeing his little sister play, tears drenching his eyes as he witnesses the beauty of her innocence, the sincerity and purity of who she is. In other words, Holden's journey is one of enlightenment. When he sees his little sister, he experiences a deep, genuine love despite his misanthropic disposition.
Granted, I have spent way too much time reading, and re-reading, Salinger. But perspective helps.
Salinger hated the type of attention this book received and dismissed the whole thing as a "dragged out fad", and never quite recovered from it personally, despite forever trying and seemingly apologizing for it, till the very end... It's as though Salinger himself felt as a phonie for having written this book, and having used the type of bait-and-switch that made it popular. I hope the irony is not lost in the fact that the book seems to mostly appeals to those who are themselves total phonies. Due to my love of nearly all “classics”, I persistently read this book several times in order to “get it” (at different ages, including at Holden’s age -over two decades ago- AND lastly in 2010). Considering all this and the fact that even the name of the book is a letdown of a joke, my reaction was always the same thing you get from a bad mislabeled YouTube video: “I want my time that I spent on this thing back”… In my PERSONAL experience/opinion, there are two types of people who like this book (everyone else doesn’t): ONE is the high-brow beatnik wannabes who use it as a condescending tool to speak down to those who actually enjoy good books (often doing so with vague references to other classic writers while engagin in drawn-out descriptions of the mundane details in Catcher) and TWO, people that have read maybe 6 books in their life (if that!) and bask in the mystique and the resulting nobility that goes along with claiming that this literary failure is their "favorite"... Next time you have a facebook addicted frat boy claim that Catcher is their "FAVORITE" book, ask them if they have read any other work by the author and inquire about how many other books they claim to have read...
Few people genuinely like this book, Salinger himself, certainly was not one of them. People have the right to think what they want of a certain book, some people like Mein Kemp... fine. However, as eloquently put by O Wilde, there are only two types of writing: Good and Bad. In my opinion, Catcher is in the latter category. Most readers did not enjoy Catcher, nor did they like it... and no amount of hype, high-browed explanation of its "real meaning" or high school force feeding will change the fact that when polled, 90%+ of people who love to read, hate Catcher...
And there... with a certain amount of pun intended, I must say "check mate, kind sir"
Ed wrote: "Salinger hated the type of attention this book received and dismissed the whole thing as a "dragged out fad", and never quite recovered from it personally, despite forever trying and seemingly apol..."Completely agree! :)
Ed wrote: "Salinger hated the type of attention this book received and dismissed the whole thing as a "dragged out fad", and never quite recovered from it personally, despite forever trying and seemingly apol..."Indeed, Salinger hated any and all attention. And, truthfully, I'm inclined to agree with the two types of people that "like" this book, unfortunately so. I'll add a third, however. This discussion, for the most part, focuses on whether or not someone "got it." I think you, along with just about everyone else, clearly "got" it. Instead, simply, you didn't "relate" to it. I, simply, filling that third category, related deeply to it.
P.s. I laughed out loud reading your comment about Mein Kampf. I have to admit, though I didn't have patience to finish it, I found it fascinating.
Erika wrote: "Stockwell wrote: "I read it to see what all the fuss was about and I still have no idea. All I got out of it was a teenager whining about his life and college and girls and how everything sucks. I ..."i agree with your assessment. i think, to many, it appears it is just about a boy who complains about EVERYTHING. but...i think the book runs deeper than that. it is about loss, innocence, etc. i think it was a timely book when it is written and i think it is appropriate for Gen Xers. i think we can all identify with holden, in some way, whether we notice it right off the bat or if it comes later. i believe in this book and, in fact, recently recommended it to my son, who is 11. although some may think he is too young (way too young perhaps) but he has been reading more 'mature' books for a few years. on a sidenote, what got him into older-people books was jaws, by peter benchley. his reading list and mine have some definie parallels. like father, like son.
The whole "not getting it" and “getting it” is reminiscent of adolescent speech and falls in the category of the specific attitude that was described in my post above... I’ll try to do what my conscience prompts me to since there’s a minor involved, you will either "get it" or "not get it"… I have an 11 year old son, who is very mature for his age, and he’s is an avid reader of numerous genre/topics. Assuming that you are aware -in detail- of the contents of Catcher, I would say that it is bordering on child abuse/neglect to allow an 11 year old to read about homosexuals, prostitutes, perverted sex, drug use, and suicide in alternatively derogatory and admirable fashions, as is done in this book. As a parent, I would STRONGLY urge you to reconsider your decision. Reading this book has had well documented ill-effects on impressionable minds... The VERY least of which may be a classification of everybody into the "phonie" and "non-phonie" camps as done by Holden, which is rediculous in real life. He’s obviously trying to please you… “Like-father, Like-son" is nothing more than a narcissistic exercise of the ego, leave the poor kid to be himself, what’s your next book suggestion? I’d hate to know… You seem to relish the fact that you are intuitively aware that your son is “maybe far too young” for this book, based on your posting, I have the impression you are playing a dangerous game not only in the case of your book recommendations, but probably in your overall approach to parenting.
I think I may have actually been a little too young when I read it. All I can remember is Holden Caulfield smoking cigarettes and complaining about phonies. I still gave it three stars for that. Maybe I should read it again.Nietzsche and Kerouac were a lot more crucial to the casting off of my mental fetters as an adolescent, though I'm pretty sure I only superficially understood the former and perhaps overvalued the latter. Taking a couple of Robert Solomon's courses sorted me out on Nietzsche, but perhaps I should give Kerouac—and Salinger—another look.
In my experience, the people who usually don't 'get' this book are exactly the phonies and stuffed shirts that Holden Caulfield bemoans throughout the novel. It makes sense that people wouldn't want to read a novel in which a character puts down the very type of person they are. But it also makes sense to me that if someone doesn't like J.D. Salinger (or Holden Caulfield, who is generally irritating to irritating people--e.g., Ed), then I probably won't like that person. Instant litmus test.
Dear David above:PREACH IT, BROTHA
Ed wrote: "The whole "not getting it" and “getting it” is reminiscent of adolescent speech and falls in the category of the specific attitude that was described in my post above... I’ll try to do what my cons..."Amen
It didn't hold my interest at all when I read it at a young age. I tried again in my early 20's and put it down for something else. I might give it another try. I've found that books seems to be more or less interesting at different times of my life. I see some of the reply have described the character as someone I really think I would identify with in my earlier years. I never understood why anyone would ban it though?
David,Your second paragraph is written badly and makes no clear sense. If it is your attempt at some type of condescending douchebaggery or personal attack, then I feel that it is inappropriate on this vine and deserves no response. Those types of attacks should be done in person where you may face resulting consequences in the first person as opposed to the anonymity of the web. Please be clear, refrain from personal attacks on goodreads members and stick to discussing the matter at hand, i.e.: Catcher in the Rye. People have the right to NOT like a book and not be the subject of high-browed condescension by those who supposedly "got it". By your definition, 90% plus percentage of readers are "phonies" that being the number of polled actual readers who dislike Catcher! Adieu mon ami...
I don't like the idea of being called a "phony" just b/c I hate the book. I think it's just called an opinion, and saying that about the people who dislike the book is really rude, and it's a horrid way of putting people down who deserve respect for their opinions.
I read this twice, once as a teenager, and again as an adult, and can't say I found anything more than what very little I took from it the first time. I found whiny teens annoying even when I was one. But I'm posting because this book KEPT me from trying his other works for years, and that was a shame. I enjoyed them MUCH more and could have lived having read them, and never this. So don't be put off by Catcher if you don't like it, try one of his others, they're actually quite good.
Ed wrote: "The whole "not getting it" and “getting it” is reminiscent of adolescent speech and falls in the category of the specific attitude that was described in my post above... I’ll try to do what my cons..."I concur.
Teatime wrote: "This may be my favorite book of all time. It's about love of a dead brother and how the family cannot get past his death. It's about a boy who wants to wipe out all the profanity in the world so th..."Thank you for a great review of a book I love. Well put! Indeed good taste.
Nathan wrote: "i believe in this book and, in fact, recently recommended it to my son, who is 11. although some may think he is too young (way too young perhaps) but he has been reading more 'mature' books for a few years. on a sidenote, what got him into older-people books was jaws, by peter benchley"Jaws is more of a horror novel. The Catcher in the Rye is a little more racy. I don't think it's appropriate for an 11 yr old. Even a mature one.
Sorry ladies. Its a guy thing.
I have a theory that it was the public reaction to Catcher in the Rye that drove Salinger into seclusion. The book was simultaneously hugely popular and completely misunderstood -- just the type of thing that drove Salinger nuts. Holden isn't supposed to be some James Dean, disaffected voice of a generation. He's a sensitive kid recovering from a nervous breakdown and describing -- indirectly and incompletely -- what drove him to that point. I love this book, but I'd never assign it to high school students, or, worse, students in junior high, which is when I was first assigned to read it. Read it as an adult, and think about exactly who it is in this novel that needs to be "caught." Then maybe you'll get it. Or maybe not ... but at least you won't be expecting Rebel Without a Cause.
Samantha wrote: "This book isn't really that complicated. I'm a 17 year old in high school, mmkay? I have never gotten high and you know what? I still got it. You don't have to be a burn out to appreciate good lit...."You write: "I pity you, if you don’t get it...", "Sucks to be them" Wow! Spoken like a true bratty teenager. The immature comment deserves no response other than this: There are many readers who understand quite well, the things you are trying to condescendingly explain, but they still dislike the book (Salinger included) and consider it bad writing, and they are consistently in the 90%+ range when polled…
Like most things that are held as "sacred", like the Great Gatsby for instance, I found completely out in left field. I put this book down after reading it and had a big question mark over my head. I couldn't understand what all the fuss was about. It actually kind of sucked really! I also feel this way about William Faulkner btw...
Sara wrote: "I thought it was interesting - but I did struggle with it; mainly because I had to concentrate so hard on understanding it. A lot of the teen lingo from that era is hard to understand - and bei..."
Oh wow I never thought of what a person outside the US might think. At least we have some idea as movies or our grandparents have used some of the slang. Although the new generation might have way less exposure to the slang.
Slang or not, the new generation is all-too familiar with one word that is prevalent throughout the novel: phonies. My students frequently express their frustration at people who are "fake". I think this novel will reach them at least on that level if not on others.
Stockwell wrote: "I read it to see what all the fuss was about and I still have no idea. All I got out of it was a teenager whining about his life and college and girls and how everything sucks. I don't understand w..."Yeah I think one needs to read it in their teens. I read it couple of years ago - and I'm in my 50s, didn't get it either, that said my wife read it while she was at school and she loved it! So there you go.
Francine wrote: "I liked Catcher in the Rye but it wasn't a book that I adored. I empathized with Holden, though, maybe cause I'm a teenager.In my understanding, he is a lonely teenager looking for someone to t..."
I think out of all of us here, though I'm not a teenage boy, I may have the most in common with the teenager that Holden was at the start of this book. And let me tell you, I hated (and still hate) this book. And before someone suggests that I read it again....I have read it 3 times, and while it didn't suck quite as terribly the last two times, it still generally is one of the worst books I've ever read. I read this in high school...where I went to boarding school in New England, and was often alone outside of it. I'd been to NY and explored several times as well. I think like a few people said above - the people who like this book end up being nothing like Holden. His relatively privileged life and his mind are like two separate people who have nothing to do with each other. Holden is essentially an old hermit's view of what a disillusioned teenager would be like if he could possess him for a short while. Its awful and I hated his attitude.
The thread I replied to is really the only humanizing and realistic thread of this book I saw - and as a kid who didn't live at home, I can empathize with that desire to connect with another. But that's it.
who decides which book is rated a classic????? Are the Harry Potter Series, Twilight series going to be termed as classics in the future?????
I got it but that was probably helped because I first read it when I was in puberty. I attended a military academy along the eastern coast of the US. It was required reading and I enjoyed reading it. It wasn’t until years later (after re-reading it) that the reason I first enjoyed it because I could identify with Holden Caulfield. The connection has faded slightly with age but it remains one of those classics that everyone should read; at least once. In answer to Alex's question only time(and the reading public) will decide if contemporary novels will ever attain the title of "CLASSIC."
Did anyone notice that, in the first paragraph while Holden is introducing himself, he's actually at a clinic? We did its analyze at school and it really shocked me.
I personally enjoyed the book. It took me a bit to get into it but once I did, I liked it.
Oh, I get it. The whole coming of age, desire to freeze innocence in time, the shock and awe of the language in a time era. Oh wait, isn't that what everyone is saying about context and time eras, etc....But, I have read it three or four times for a variety of reason and have never ever related or like the novel.
I agree with most comments above. I don't see the greatness in this book to merit it being called a classic.
Melissa wrote: "Referencing Paul's comment about a classic standing the test of time, I find myself wondering what makes a book a classic? And why? I picked up "Moby Dick" recently expecting a rollicking good re..."I cannot understand why so much as been made about this book...i struggled through it...thought of giving up many times...but plodded on....and at the end I thought...yes what is this book really about I wonder? Someone mentioned that it was written for the generation of it's time...perhaps Harry Potter, Twilight etc will be the classics of our time and in 50 years time someone will probably wonder the same thing we do....does anyone think that the surge of interest in the book happenned because of john lennon's death and the crazy man having a copy of this book with him?
I agree that this book wasn't what I expected. I read it on a long flight just to see what the fuss was about and I still don't get it. He is a whiney teenage brat and I just don't get it!!! Maybe it's for some people or I was just past the age limit this book was meant for.
I was on a mission to read the classics. I forced myself to finish this book. I guess I must be among the less-enlightened; I didn't get it. Seems a total waste of my time. I couldn't have felt any different if I had read it when I was younger. It just didn't scream "Must Read!"
I read this when I was fourteen, and I thought it was stirring at that time, but as I got older and became more world enlightened, this book wasn't too big a deal.
364 comments so far both pro and con reminds us that this book wont go away any time soon.
I read this book in 10th grade and thought it was a joke. By that time, I'd already read real classics like Jane Eyre and David Copperfield, so, for me, this book didn't come close to measuring up. From a teenage male's point of view, I thought Holden was a complete wimp. Being from a family with no money, I couldn't relate at all to his angst (Oh dear, I'm rich. Whatever will I do?). If I read the book now, I might have a different take, but something tells me it still wouldn't measure up to anything by Waugh, Greene, or Heller.
Awesome! South Park finally chimes in on "America's Most Controversial Book" in Season 14 Episode 2 The Tale of Scrotie McBoogerballs. Mr. Garrison assigns Catcher in the Rye to our lovable 4th Grade class with dire warnings/promises of vulgarity and mature themes. A sorely disappointed Cartman exclaims, "****, I just read a book for nothing!", while Stan and Kyle comment, "Did you get to any dirty parts yet?", "No it's still just some whiney annoying teenager talking about how lame he is."Pure poetry!
This grabastic waste of paper pulp has been riding the coat-tails of its own undeserved reputation for far too long!
I read thi sbook when I was 20/21. I had to force myself to finish it, from the very beginning I found it dull and irritating. Nothing seems to happen and it all seems rather pointless. I feel I missed something, since I truly hated this book. I don't see why it's so adored or even why its supposedly scandalous. I even read those interpretations of the novels themes to try and see if I missed anything. Nope. It's still awful even when you analyse it. Well said South Park!
When I read it as teenager I even felt the book was just way overwritten and obnoxious. I re-read it as an adult and I just don't get how it has become a staple in American Literature. I truly believe it would not be that popular today if it weren't for Mark David Chapman who decided to kill one the greatest men to ever grace this world with his talent and love. Repulsive book.
all discussions on this book
|
post a new topic
The Thirty-Nine Steps (other topics)
Out of Revolution: Autobiography of Western Man (other topics)
The Wonderful Wizard of Oz (other topics)
Nicholas and Alexandra: The Classic Account of the Fall of the Romanov Dynasty (other topics)
More...
John Green (other topics)
J.D. Salinger (other topics)
Books mentioned in this topic
Bambi: A Life in the Woods (other topics)The Thirty-Nine Steps (other topics)
Out of Revolution: Autobiography of Western Man (other topics)
The Wonderful Wizard of Oz (other topics)
Nicholas and Alexandra: The Classic Account of the Fall of the Romanov Dynasty (other topics)
More...
Authors mentioned in this topic
J.D. Salinger (other topics)John Green (other topics)
J.D. Salinger (other topics)
Just want to let you know what a breath of fresh air your comments are to read. Thank you.