The Catcher in the Rye
discussion
Did anyone else just not "get" this book?
Well I'm 18 and I just read this book and I really enjoyed it, even though I'm not a stoner. For those who are not teens and felt like "so what?", that's kind of the point. Teenage characters in movies today are unrealistic, but Holden is an easy character to relate to, he's just trying to understand himself. That's why I think this book is a big deal, it's a real teenager not a "special" one. So what makes the book great is that it isn't special, it's real.
I got something totally different from this book- it's the portrait of Holden's descent into madness as the symptoms of mental illness increase in severity during puberty.
Dromedary wrote: "I thought it was about a lost, under-appreciated member of a baseball team that fell into a bread making machine."That is the best take I've read here! Lol!7
It's not about someone leaping through the field with a butterfly net ?
Peter wrote: "My main problem with this book, and with The Great Gatsby too, is basically, Who gives a shit about rich people? Impossible to sympathize or empathize with rich people."People with wealth also have their problems. Money shouldn't be the factor.
I also read Cathcher In The Rye and did not really like it a lot. I know it's a " Classic" but it is not one I ever really got or will ever reread. I read Frannie and Zooey but didn't like it any better. Guess I am just not a SalInger fan.
The whole point of the book is that none of it ever happened- or at least, you don't know what's true and what isn't. He's writing it from a mental institution... so the whining, the swearing, the getting kicked out of school- they're all stories, and some of them might be true.
i grew up in the UK, read the book when i was 15, and i loved it. i love it to this day. i think it's like a piece of music - it either strikes something in you, or it doesn't. but just because it doesn't at one point in your life, it might connect later on in a whole new way. that's the beauty of a great work of art. imo
I adore Catcher, I read it once a year. It is about the struggles of adolescence. Holden is a sensitive young man who yearns for authentic human connections in a world that is becoming increasingly shallow and politically correct. Moreover, the genius of the book is the unique voice that Salinger created for Holden, which is both funny and tragic at the same time. He is the 20th century equivalent of Hamlet -- a young man mourning his inability to act against injustice. Like Hamlet, we witness, through his own words, the pyschological breakdown of a fragile protagonist. I loved this book when I was 20 and I still love it at 40.
Holden is someone who hates phonies. but he is a phony. so he might hate himself.
J.h, wrote: "I adore Catcher, I read it once a year. It is about the struggles of adolescence. Holden is a sensitive young man who yearns for authentic human connections in a world that is becoming increasingly..."Very, very well said.
Savannah wrote: "Holden is someone who hates phonies. but he is a phony. so he might hate himself."That's the point. He's supposed to be hypocritical. He has his flaws. As a reader, you're supposed to analyze him.
Leslie wrote: "The whole point of the book is that none of it ever happened- or at least, you don't know what's true and what isn't. He's writing it from a mental institution... so the whining, the swearing, the ..."I think everything Holden wrote really happened. However, it's just that Holden explained all the events in his very own perspective. He tells you things the way he says them, and he's often biased when doing so. As the reader, you have to analyze the character's flaws. Holden is obviously shown to be hypocritical at times, but he doesn't directly state it. You're supposed to use your judgment to figure that out.
It's a really weird book. I understood it just fine, but I don't understand WHY it's so popular. I've read way better "American classics" than Catccher in the Rye.
Xenon wrote: "It's a really weird book. I understood it just fine, but I don't understand WHY it's so popular. I've read way better "American classics" than Catccher in the Rye."It's just different than a typical novel. There is a plot, but this book is more about what Holden feels rather than what's going on. Holden's pain is real. If you're interested in psychology, you'll probably enjoy this book better.
When people say they don't understand this book, they mean they're disappointed that this book lacks a plot similar to the novels they've always been reading. They don't understand that this book is completely different from all the other books they've read. It's a work of art. You just need to think more about it.
I read it just last month and didn't care for it. I had a hard time relating to Holden and just didn't like the style. Not every book is for everyone, that's what makes reading so great!
I read it a couple of days ago, and I'm 18, so I thought I would sort of understand the character of Holden/the book a little better. It got better towards the end, and I enjoyed the Holden-Phoebe relationship, but that was pretty much all I got out of it. I just didn't understand it on the whole.
Pooja wrote: "I read it a couple of days ago, and I'm 18, so I thought I would sort of understand the character of Holden/the book a little better. It got better towards the end, and I enjoyed the Holden-Phoebe ..."Pay attention to what Holden says about people around him, how he calls them "phony," and how he seems to be hypocritical. Analyze his problems.
I didnt get it and I hated it! I read a LOT and many books have been crap... this one stayed in my mind as something really boring and senseless. How this book became a "classic"???? Shouldnt a classic be timeless??? This book will have no sense at all in very few years
I guess you really need to put it in perspective. Catcher in the Rye today does not ring controversial but when it was published in 1951 it was considered obscene, overly sexual, and not appropriate for the students it was written from the prospective of. Putting it in context, books that were considered worthy of banning at the same time, To Kill a Mockingbird, and Brave New World. Catcher in the Rye was one of the first books that gave a true voice to teenagers. It was not a watered down version that the culture was used to reading. For me, one of the best.
I have to say that this is one of those books that lives with me, is genuinely residing in some cortex in the brain. And each time I read it (or teach it)there is always some little diamond-like fragment of truth or art that re-engages me. This time out, I had just taught "Perfect Day for Bananafish" which leads off with the famous Zen koan about one hand clapping. It hit me, that Holden's preoccupation with the ducks is like his personal koan: "where do the ducks go when the lagoon freezes". And it hit me that Holden, like many of us, is looking for some assurance that this universe is benevolent(especially in light of Allie's death.
I read this book last year and really analyzed it textually. I viewed Holden as a boy who does not know how to deal with the situations he has faced in life. He says one thing about others, but in turn is what he accuses others of. Holden clearly rebels against society, breaking laws, etc., so he is not angelic by any means, but he is not truly horrible to others (he is there for his sister and mourns his brothers death and memory). As for his issues, Holden clearly suffers from clinical depression. This was not 'acceptable' and perhaps why his symptoms were not diagnosed to the extent they should have been. The books holds multiple examples of symbolism (such as his 'people hunting' hat, ducks, his hair, and the word caul (Caulfield). If you are curious, look up what a caul is and it's meaning in history. Quite fascinating, and it is clear the author intended it to be meaningful. As for the hat, it is his sense of protection from others. His hair relates back to the caul symbolism, but also to his brother, who he in a way carries with him. The books might seem pointless, confusing, etc. if you read it for face value, but it is in fact full of double-meanings. It is one of my personal favorites. =)
Emela wrote: "I read this book last year and really analyzed it textually. I viewed Holden as a boy who does not know how to deal with the situations he has faced in life. He says one thing about others, but in ..."Emela, I'm curious: If it is one of your personal faves, why did you just rate it with 3 stars?
Robin wrote: "South Park? That show is rubbish. There is nothing gruesome maybe controversial, since the voice of Holden Caulfield spoke much like another movie of about that same time, Rebel without a Cause. ..."South Park does more work pointing out cultural phoniness than Caulfield ever did.
I had no idea about this book when I took it up.After reading it, all I could think was that its such an idiotic book. But at the same time I enjoyed reading it.
So much of how a book affects us has to do with our personal experiences up until that point which include the books we've read. I didn't understand why this book was so popular when I read it. It wasn't unpleasant to read, but it didn't really affect me. Just before reading this book, I re-read The Great Gatsby and read The Outsiders. I saw a lot of similarities between Holden and Pony Boy, at least in the beginning. I really enjoyed the Outsiders, but didn't enjoy Catcher. I think that if The Catcher in the Rye had found me first, I might have received it differently.
'Catcher' was compulsory reading in my highschool, and being the same age as Holden, I certainly didn't 'get' it. It took me a few more years, perhaps in the same way an older Salinger was writing about a younger Holden. Holden finds nothing real to relate to. Be it girls or school. For example, school is where we go to go to college afterwards to 'get' a good job to marry and have a family. Holden is the guy that looks at all this and it simply doesn't make sense, instinctively. He's got no direction, no real values that can guide him out of the quagmire into something more meaningful. He lies without feeling it's wrong. He is like a huge ship on the ocean trying to figure out where's the port and if there's really any point heading that way. In short, Holden is not prepared to let society dictate it's terms to him and what we are reading is just the first stage, the questions of a teenager trying to fit it all together.
I read it in school and was bored silly. I re-read it recently and was bored silly. Self-indulgent idiot as the protagonist. A waste of time to read. How this became considered a classic is beyond me. Yech!
Sorry to say, I'm with you on this one too. I never had to read it in school, but picked it up as I usually enjoy the "classics". I had to force myself to finish this one to see if it ever got better. A "bratty whining pathological liar" is all I got out of it.
I was interested in seeing the comments of the people who didn't get it because this is my number one favorite book of all time. I read this book my junior year of high school when I felt lost, alone and ignored by my family. I was caught between childhood and adulthood and my mood was was all over the place. It felt good reading this book and having something to relate to and for that this book is always going to be special to me. I can see how this book would be kind of boring and not good to some. I think you either just get it or you don't.
Angel wrote: "I was interested in seeing the comments of the people who didn't get it because this is my number one favorite book of all time. I read this book my junior year of high school when I felt lost, alo..."Vera, I couldn't agree with you more. It's got my vote as the most over-rated classic ever.
If you missed it, you'll never get it. But you just might be one of the "phonies" he talked about. This book always makes me think about being "authentic" in life and when I come across "phonies" I know I'm not alone in how I see them. Too bad you all missed that, but it's okay. It matters little.
Rod wrote: "'Catcher' was compulsory reading in my highschool, and being the same age as Holden, I certainly didn't 'get' it. It took me a few more years, perhaps in the same way an older Salinger was writing ..."When I was in high school(the mid 70's) you weren't allowed to have the book, it was that controversial.
Jennifer wrote: "If you missed it, you'll never get it. But you just might be one of the "phonies" he talked about. This book always makes me think about being "authentic" in life and when I come across "phonies"..."If they get it, no words are necessary. If they don't understand it, a thousand words won't explain it.
I don't think it has much to do with where the reader is from, I was born and raised in Mexico City, have lived most of my life in California and I still enjoyed this book a lot, I gave it 5 stars which I don't often do.Just my two cents!
doug wrote: "Jennifer wrote: "If you missed it, you'll never get it. But you just might be one of the "phonies" he talked about. This book always makes me think about being "authentic" in life and when I come..." Yup you're right
I don't get why most classics are "classics" (besides the fact that they're old) or the significance and "deeper meaning" behind them.
Vera wrote: "I think Chapman or Hinkley were reading it before they went out to kill someone. It was banned all over the place."Mark David Chapman was reading Catcher in the Rye when he shot John Lennon in 1980. The book was banned when it was first released (1951), and has been banned off and on since then because it contains a couple instances of the f-word, and because Holden hires a prostitute, not because it has anything to do with the assassination.
Count me in, i thought it was awful but maybe I'm not exactly the intended audience:)http://upcoming4.me
Vonny wrote: "I don't get why most classics are "classics" (besides the fact that they're old) or the significance and "deeper meaning" behind them."“Ancient works are classical not because they are old, but because they are powerful, fresh, and healthy.”
"A true classic is an author who has enriched the human mind, increased its treasure, and caused it to advance a step. Maybe he has discovered some moral and not equivocal truth, or revealed some eternal passion in that heart where all seemed known and discovered."
Basically, if you're putting "deeper meaning" in quotes like it's something you think just happens on accident, you're either very young, or you just don't read a lot. Keep at it, read some more classics, learn to appreciate literature.
I read it a couple of years ago, in my early 40's and thought it was a finely written book. I didn't feel the need to like or dislike Holden, but I did enjoy the way the story unfolded and ended.For me, it was an fine read, that is all.
I read this book when I was in high school, 30+ years ago. I really liked it, and do not want to read it again, as I am 54 and jaded now. I want to remember it with my 16 year old 1974 mind and heart. I did give a copy to my then 17 year old nephew, and he liked it too.
I totally didn't get it either, maybe I don't have patience for brooding teenagers .
I honestly read a 1/4 way through this and could not stand the whiny Holden Caufield. I really dont understand how this is a best seller or such a popular book globally.
Jodie wrote: "I read believing it was a classic up there with To Kill a Mockingbird. I was WRONG what a load of pretentious crap. The character was not only whiny but he was boring. I would have to say this w..."I couldnt agree with you more!
I wonder how many men like it (since I can relate more to the character in the book) vs women who didn't like it. This might be a gender thing, pretty much like more women would love "Bossypants" by Tina Fey than men would.
Alex wrote: "I wonder now many men like it (since can relate more the the character in the book) vs women who didn't like it. This might be a gender thing, pretty much like more women would love "Bossypants" by..."I did love Bossypants!! :)
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)
Well, this novel was certainly engaging and interesting to me. The fact that Holden Caulfield has his flaws is already sufficient enough to label this book as interesting. Why does Holden stay in the phone booth for so long without being able to decide whom to call? Why does Holden constantly lie? Why is Holden the way he is?