The Catcher in the Rye The Catcher in the Rye discussion


1027 views
Annoying book about an angsty teenager, or pure gold?

Comments Showing 1-50 of 206 (206 new)    post a comment »
« previous 1 3 4 5

Emily Did you love it, or hate it?

Personally, I loved this book. I just finished it today, after starting the first 50 pages yesterday. You could say I got just a weensy bit sucked in.

From what I've gathered, people tend to hate this book because of the main character. They find him irritating and unlikable, immature and angsty...But does anyone else feel like that's sort of the point? I'm currently a teenager, and while I wouldn't do half the things Holden did, I find him to be a very relatable character. I thought that, yes, he is all of the aforementioned things, but that's what made this feel so authentic to me. Yeah, he kind of whined a lot, but really? It's rare that teens don't. He sees hypocrisy in others, but not in himself, but don't we all, even adults? He's lazy. Go figure much? The future scares him, and that's not uncommon; it kind of freaks me out, too. He tends to all but state that he hates someone in one moment, and then say something along the lines of, "He's a good guy, really," the next, and that's exactly how I feel about people, too. And then there's the angst. He gets depressed often when he thinks about things much, and honestly, I would say most of us do, too.
Plust I loved the writing style, even though it goes all over the place (and I see why that would annoy people), because if you just asked a teenage boy to tell you his story outloud, you would see the similarties between that and Holden's narrative style.

But anywho, I guess I'll shut my trap now. How did you feel about the book? Would you say you enjoyed the immature teenage perspective, or did it just annoy the living crap out of you?


Aaditya Mandalemula I like the book very much. It's a superb book. A Masterpiece.


message 3: by Sid (new) - rated it 5 stars

Sid Emily, I agree with you 100%. I read it as a teenager too, and I could easily relate with the teenage angst.

Another thing I absolutely loved about this book was his relationship with his little sister. I thought that was really sweet.


message 4: by Elia (new) - rated it 1 star

Elia One of my most hated books of ALL TIME and I read it as a teenager. It is my litmus test with people - "if you love this book we will probably not be friends" kind of thing.


message 5: by Sid (new) - rated it 5 stars

Sid Elia wrote: "One of my most hated books of ALL TIME and I read it as a teenager. It is my litmus test with people - "if you love this book we will probably not be friends" kind of thing."

What if it was my litmus test too? Like, "If you hate this book,then there is seriously something wrong with you" kind of thing. Doesn't that sound just awful? That is what you are essentially saying. You seem like a very judgemental woman.


message 6: by Elia (last edited Feb 25, 2012 08:21PM) (new) - rated it 1 star

Elia Sid wrote: "Elia wrote: "One of my most hated books of ALL TIME and I read it as a teenager. It is my litmus test with people - "if you love this book we will probably not be friends" kind of thing."

What if ..."


And you seem entirely humorless, as that was a JOKE. Although I honestly do not like the book at all, a person's reading preference has nothing to do with wether I am friends with them or not.
Also, making a judgement about me being judgemental makes YOU extremely judgemental, since you do not know anything about me other than my opinion of this book.
Furthermore, you are 100% within your rights to feel there is seriously something wrong with me for not liking the book. I completely respect your opinion of the novel, as well as your poor taste in literature.


Alana all right then, on a different note.... I did not like the book at all when I read it as a teenager, and frankly, have no desire to reread it. On the other hand, I can see why others would enjoy it and relate to it as well. I also feel that it is a classic because it has held up over time, and as the first person showed, teenagers even now can relate. And it was pretty innovative at the time. It's like a lot of literature; some love it, some hate it, some well.... you know.


Shawn Bird The interesting thing about Catcher in the Rye is that beyond the oh so typical teen-ness of Holden, it is also a very accurate portrayal of someone in the midst of a mental break down. No one talked about mental illness when the book was written: it was a taboo subject. I find that students who know something of depression, either from personal experience, or among those close to them, can relate to this story very well. Those who tend to think of depression as weakness, often dislike it, because they can't connect to the theme.


Samuel Finley Wow. Only a handfull of comments and there is already a full-blown brawl through comments over the book and opinions and everything...

I usually stay out of these things, but I really liked The Catcher in the Rye. It was a nice book. That's all I'll say, to keep this short and to the point.


message 10: by Licha (new) - added it

Licha I haven't read this book in a while but I remember loving it both times I read it. Maybe because at the time I was feeling some of the same feelings as the main character towards a lot of people in general. I might have to read this one again though because reading some of the posts on here makes me realize I have forgotten some of the parts mentioned. I would recommend this book. I had a good connection to the character each time I read it.


message 11: by [deleted user] (new)

I read this book during one of my more turbulent teenage years, and it had a powerful affect. It was the first time I'd heard someone describe the kind of thoughts and craziness that was going through my own head, kind of had one of those, 'it's not just me,' moments. Not that it's really a good thing to feel like you can relate to Holden...
I've heard that the book is much harder to appreciate or enjoy post-teenage years, and sometimes wonder if I should re-read to see, or just leave my current positive memory as is. Anyone read this when they were a teenage and then again in adulthood?


message 12: by Brad (new) - rated it 5 stars

Brad Cotton It's a book, and like all worthwhile art, there will be no consensus. Argue all you like. I hate to tell you, but you're all correct.


Kirby Shawn wrote: "The interesting thing about Catcher in the Rye is that beyond the oh so typical teen-ness of Holden, it is also a very accurate portrayal of someone in the midst of a mental break down. No one tal..."

that's a good point.


Kirby Andrew wrote: "Anyone read this when they were a teenage and then again in adulthood? "

well, I sort of did. I read it first as a teen and remember really loving it. then I tried to reread it a year or so ago, and I didn't even make it all the way through it. I'll try to finish it off eventually, but I think it's safe to say that my opinion of it has changed since I was a teenager...


Alexandria I honestly only read this book because I had to for school. But after awhile I actually started to like it. I know this is kinda cheesy but I could see myself in Holden :) Hopefully I'll continue to like it.


Marisa I honestly loved this book. I wouldn't have read it if it wasn't for school, but now that I have read it I absolutely love it. I can say for sure that Catcher in the Rye is my favorite book. I love how it is told all in first person and I love how I got to know the complexity of one character. It was amazing to be able to live in Holden's mind for a little while. If I haven;t said this enough I absolutely loved this book. Franny and Zooey was also a good read but The Catcher in The Rye was fantastic.


Alana When I was teaching English and had to choose whether to teach Catcher in the Rye or The Chrysalids, I chose to teach The Chrysalids. Only because the thought of reading about a whiny teenager, and then teaching whiny teenagers was too much. I also loved the themes in The Chrysalids far more than Catcher in the Rye. But... I always encouraged my students to read it, and discuss it with me on their own.

Oh and I agree with the comment about dealing with mental illness and depression, and that comment has made me rethink a bit about the story. Although I think my dislike of the novel had more to do with the writing style that didn't overall appeal to me. I feel the same way about Hemmingway in that the writing style wasn't for me. However, they are classics and should be read, but they will not always be enjoyed.


Gregory Allen Pure gold! I was in my mid-20s when I first read it and I've been rereading it every few years since. Emily, not much I could add to your excellent points. Try Nine Stories, also by J.D. Salinger, if you haven't already.


readingpenguin14 Pure gold!! I loved it. I thought it was a great read about coming of age.


message 20: by Isabella (last edited Feb 28, 2012 06:20PM) (new) - rated it 1 star

Isabella Tugman - Audiobook Narrator You know? I had high hopes, but I ended up not liking it much at all. Not that it's bad writing or anything, just that I didn't find it all too interesting or entertaining.

I did, in fact, read it as a teenager.

I read a review that said something along the lines of "If you were the stoner kid skipping class in school, you love this book." I think that sounds about accurate. Of course more than those kids will love this book, but you know what I'm saying.

I understand why it is famous. It was revolutionary and unlike anything ever written before that time- a look into the life of, well, an angsty teenager. It was shocking and raw, and presents a character that is very real and troubled.


readingpenguin14 Gregory wrote: "Pure gold! I was in my mid-20s when I first read it and I've been rereading it every few years since. Emily, not much I could add to your excellent points. Try Nine Stories, also by J.D. Salinger, ..."

Thank Gregory, read your review and have added Nine Stories to my list!


message 22: by Lena (new) - rated it 4 stars

Lena Isabella wrote: "I read a review that said something along the lines of "If you were the stoner kid skipping class in school, you love this book." I think that sounds about accurate.
. ..."


I was a straight-A, honor class nerd in school who had never so much as seen pot, and I loved this book when I read it. I think it has stood the test of time because adolescent years are confusing and often full of anger, especially for boys who are all hopped up on rising testosterone levels.
But, as a nerd girl, I still related to this book. I think almost all teenagers get to the point where they realize mom and dad are just real people with mistakes, and it's a kind of betrayal to realize they aren't infallible heroes how you thought when you were a little kid. I don't think it's for stoners skipping classes so much as for anyone who ever had the sudden realization that adult life is full of hypocrisy and conformity (and it pissed you off).


Isabella Tugman - Audiobook Narrator Lena wrote: "Isabella wrote: "I read a review that said something along the lines of "If you were the stoner kid skipping class in school, you love this book." I think that sounds about accurate.
. ..."

I w..."


Well-said :) I agree that's why people love the book. I saw that...but for some reason I just didn't enjoy it like I thought I would

I was also a straight-A nerdy student with plenty of angst :)


message 24: by Topaz (last edited Feb 28, 2012 06:44PM) (new) - rated it 5 stars

Topaz Goold I found it to be a good read, but the writing style was tedious. It made the story halt often and made me think of Steinbeck, only without the nice prose, actual sentence structure, well-developed characters etc... that make his books so great (in my opinion)

As a teenage reader, Holden wasn't relatable to me, but the portrayal of mental illness and the sibling= mentor/pupil relationship with Phoebe kept me reading, even through Holden's embarassing romantic encounters and obsession with his hat and ducks.

If we didn't have to read and over-analyze this in school, I would have enjoyed it more.


message 25: by Ross (new) - rated it 4 stars

Ross Bauer While I did like the book for it's over all simplicity and the acerbic way in which Caulfield observes everything around him, and tries to articulate his feelings about these things using his fairly limited but nevertheless expressive vocabulary. For me this is one of those books that you have to read at least once to experience it. Whether you love or hate it is largely irrelevant, although it does influence how you approach the book, and whether or not you can stick it out till the end.

I guess it depends what you want out of reading a book, and I did not go into this expecting to be entertained, I was expecting some thought-provoking stuff that I could at least on one level relate to, and in that I was not disappointed. Personally I'm glad that this book didn't come under my scope when I was studying Literature at University, because as a born reader, I detest being told how to read a book and what frameworks o thought have been placed around it by which screwed up critic. But that's what lit crit is essentially about, and while I couldn't care less what certain uptight gits think, I have developed, in my view, my own approach to literary criticism.

For me, this is not a book I would care to revisit, I have experienced it, understood what I can of it, and taken from it whatever impressions it gave me. I don't, as a rule reread books, as I get bored when I already know what to expect, but even if I were inclined to reread something, the only reason I would, would be in connection to some academic pursuit, and I had my fill of that doing my Masters.

Provocative, insightful, caustically critical, and unexpectedly humourous, are words I would use to describe it, definitely worth reading, at least once.


message 26: by Beth (new) - rated it 5 stars

Beth I have mixed feelings about the book.

On one hand i didnt like it cause sometimes it felt to me like there wasn't much of a story. In some places i felt like i was just reading a account of the day in Holden's life without any actual point to it.

However, on the other hand i really liked it and i think that was solely because of the character. Holden is a beautiful character. I find him to be a real, down to earth kind of character and i really enjoyed reading from his p.o.v. I find the concept of bildungsroman comes through really strongly in Holden and it kind of sweet in a weird way. I enjoyed reading his critical nature about society and found it a little insightful.

Overall i did quite like the book though its certainly not one of my favourites.


Jennifer Dupriest OMG I totally agree! I've read so many books so far and I have to say that this book "THE CATCHER IN THE RYE" is my favorite out of all of them! I understood what Holden was going through and felt like he was right!
This Book is PURE GOLD :D


message 28: by Wastrel (new) - added it

Wastrel You seem to be discounting the possibility that this is BOTH an annoying book about an angsty teenager AND pure gold.

Having said that, and not having read Catcher in quite a while, I preferred Billy Liar. Similar angsty-teenager monologue, only funny, and set in Yorkshire, about a would-be comedy writer desparate to leave his boring Yorkshire town to go to London, while pathologically lying to everybody around him and fantasising about an imaginary country that he's President of.


message 29: by [deleted user] (new)

Wastrel wrote: "You seem to be discounting the possibility that this is BOTH an annoying book about an angsty teenager AND pure gold.

Strong truth. Holden is a fairly irritating narrator, but just because I do not like a character does not mean I cannot like a novel. It doesn't help that we are moving further away from the specific time and place that the novel is set. This isn't helping for socio-economic relatability as well as the specific patois that Holden employs.

That being said, the novel is still fairly well constructed and Holden is a remarkably well-drawn character.

I may sound arrogant, but I've found in discussions on Goodreads that many many readers tend to zero in on their relationship between the characters and their feelings. Certainly this novel is a perfect example. Readers cannot separate their emotional connection with the character from their reading of the text. It should be axiomatic that disliking a character does not mean disliking a text. For further examples of this, see the threads on Franzen's Freedom. People loathe that novel if only because the cast is loathsome. It seems to be a rather simplistic reading of a text rather than engaging with the text.


Nelly I both love it and hate it. I hate it because of the narrative and the poor vocabulary, even thought I understand their purpose. It's just not a book I would read for aestethic pleasure.
However, I do appreciate it. The book, like everything I've read from Salinger so far, is full of symbolism. You have to analyse it to understand it, it's not one of those books in which everything is clear from the start. When I began reading it, I couldn't understand it and that's why I hated it. But then I started asking questions and it all made sense.
Why is Holden so annoying? He hates people but he's always asking someone to hang out. He is lonely but can't relate to the outside world. The only people he really likes are Jane and his siblings. He can't make connections.
And speaking of Jane... I think he loved her. Ironically this is exactly the reason why he can't sleep with her. He sees sex as something degrading for women and he doesn't want to do such a thing to a girl he likes. Read the scene at the hotel, that first night with all the 'perverts'. And his whole attitude in general.
He also thinks of sex as an adult business. And he sees the adult world as corrupt. He values childlike innocence and that's why he wants to be 'the catcher in the rye' - he wants to prevent children from growing, from entering the corrupt and pervert adult world. The irony is that he just can't erase all the 'fuck you's in the world. And besides, he himself isn't a child anymore. Some of you think of him as immature and from a certain point of view he really is. But I think on many topics he's wise beyond his years.
In the end he realises that you can't stop children from growing up. That scene with Phoebe and the carousel. It's so touching for me. And this is why I love the book.


message 31: by Kali (new) - rated it 5 stars

Kali Emily wrote: "Did you love it, or hate it?

Personally, I loved this book. I just finished it today, after starting the first 50 pages yesterday. You could say I got just a weensy bit sucked in.

From what ..."

You are one smart and open-minded teenager - to pick up a classic(old book) like this and recognize at once the ageless heart at the core of all good literature .


Lostshadows Emily wrote: "From what I've gathered, people tend to hate this book because of the main character. They find him irritating and unlikable, immature and angsty"

I found him boring. That's pretty much the kiss of death for me for a main character.


message 33: by Kali (last edited Mar 19, 2012 12:07PM) (new) - rated it 5 stars

Kali I think it is the book or play or poem that needs to be likable not necessarily the characters in it.
Else one would read Romeo and Juliet but never Macbeth.


Jeanie macgregor wrote: "Wastrel wrote: "You seem to be discounting the possibility that this is BOTH an annoying book about an angsty teenager AND pure gold.
...
I may sound arrogant, but I've found in discussions on Goodreads that many many readers tend to zero in on their relationship between the characters and their feelings. Certainly this novel is a perfect example. Readers cannot separate their emotional connection with the character from their reading of the text...

There is a time and place for everything, and reading as an exercise in finding the deeper meanings, analyzing the prose style, comprehending the characters' motivations though loathesome, etc. has its place or perhaps time. College was that time for me. For the vast majority of readers, reading is entertainment--even if it also happens to be informative or thought-provoking. But the majority of us don't care to analyze the joy out of our favorite reads. More than that though, is that my own life has sufficient dealings with totally unpleasant people, anxieties and stress from all sides, and losses and tragedies aplenty. I have no need to spend additional time stressing over the books I read. In the same line, someone said earlier that people may dislike the book because they have difficulty dealing with the topic of depression or mental illness. I can assure you that isn't the case for me. It's just that it isn't very pleasant watching the world from a depressed person's point of view. Life is too short and holds enough sorrows not to have to borrow more from a fictional character.

I read this book while a teen because my high school English Lit teacher had it in the row of books on his desk he believed everyone should read. I guess you could say I didn't get it at the time, and appreciate it no better now as an older adult. It's one of those books that you get or you don't, love or you don't. I suppose I must admit that it wasn't a waste to have read it. I approached much of my reading prior to age thirty as a sort of supplement to my own life experiences and insights into the way of all things. It's not that I know all I need to know now, it's just that what I learned is that life is too short to waste a moment of it on things that don't add to the quality of my life--angst and depression aren't quality enhancers. I'm not the kind of person who either rejoices in the sorrows of others or feels better after a sad/tragic book because it makes my own life feel better by comparison. I appreciate books that are complex and thought-provoking, but I want to feel lifted up rather than dragged down at the end of it.



Timothy McNeil I read this book for the first time as an adult, and I found nothing profound nor even noteworthy in it. Now, if I had read it as an adolescent (especially in an environment where it was required to graft meaning to it, say for a class), I may have felt differently.

Holden isn't in the midst of a mental breakdown. He's just an a-hole, albeit one that has been heavily shaped by parental and peer neglect. Except that even that tends to play false (or is not consistent with the literature on the effects of such neglect on developmental relationships).

It may be my least favorite piece of literature, though to be fair I made very little effort to seek out well regarded fiction until a few years ago so my sample size is far from impressive.

While I would never hold it against someone who found something meaningful in the story, I just cannot get there myself. The self-important, self-deluding, self-indulging, irresponsible 'hero' is not one that interests me, not even in an academic sense.


message 36: by Tru (last edited Mar 26, 2012 12:55PM) (new) - rated it 2 stars

Tru I didn't like it. Holden is just a whiny little a-hole and we all know that, I think. Perhaps some people can relate to that, and in some ways so can I, but that doesn't mean I enjoyed reading about it.
The only profound effect this book had on me was that it spurned a desire to stop being an angst ridden little whiner in my own life.


Heather-Lea My husband have opposite opinions- I loved it and he hated it (visa-versa for Great Gatsby). I loved the way his brain seemed to jump from one thing to another-I could relate to him at that point in time. I wonder if my love for the book would be different after the last 12 years of life and growth... I may need to find out.
My husband said he viewed Holden as the whiny teenager and all that goes with it. It's a "Love it or hate it" kind of book.


message 38: by Tru (new) - rated it 2 stars

Tru Jamesepowell wrote: "I found Holden to be so annoying that, for years, I couldn't get more than thirty or so pages into the book before putting it down. But after I became a high school English teacher at age 50 I felt..."

You are a very patient woman.


Helen Laycock Going back to an earlier comment by Andrew, I am one of those people who read it as a teenager then went back to it much later in adulthood.

In my teens I identified so much with the main character and I felt the book had perfectly captured the feelings of adolescence and the need to rebel. It was almost like a revelation to me and became my 'favourite book ever'.

Throughout the years I forgot the actual story, but recollected fondly my reaction to it. Last year I decided to indulge myself and read it again. However, I found myself frowning and wondering what it was about it that had moved me so much in my earlier years. Since the book has remained the same, I must conclude that I have changed into quite a different person over time.

Perhaps it is so successful as it somehow taps into that teenage angst at a time when it matters most to the reader.

I now find that I have no compulsion whatsoever to read it again. I had my fix but it failed to recreate any of those original stirrings. In fact, I found it quite boring now I'm all grown up...


Marisa I am currently a teenager and I absolutely adore this book! I reread it at least 3 times a year. I guess that is just me though considering no one seems to be a fan.


message 41: by Sls (new) - rated it 3 stars

Sls Meh.


Mariam I finished this book just last month for a class reading assignment. I truly absolutely loved this book. It's funny because while I thoroughly enjoyed this book, every single person in my class absolutely hated it. I really thought this book hit the jackpot in so many ways. Yes, Holden Caulfield is a character that is so misunderstood, but as I read about him, I felt a connection and could understand how he felt about the world and about people. I could understand his sadness, lonliness, and how he felt so alone in this big world. When people say they disliked this book, it's mainly because they feel like Holden was complaining the whole time and was just completely delusional. While this may be true, there was also a reason. Holden felt so sad in the world and was filled with so much resentment. I guess one has to be very empathetic in order to understand how Holden felt. I want to read this book again sometime because it really hit home with me. I feel like Catcher in the Rye was written to perfectly show the mind and thoughts of a boy who was just so unstable emotionally and I personally thought it was brilliant beyond belief.


message 43: by Tru (new) - rated it 2 stars

Tru He may have thought that the world was filled with much resentment, but he also resented the world. It's not that my heart is cold, and therefore incapable of feeling empathy towards someone who is in emotional turmoil; I have experienced emotional turmoil throughout my entire life, and can relate. No, instead I see that he was quite hypocritical and closed minded in the way he viewed the world. Emotional turmoil or not, the kid was ridden with angst, and didn't for a moment stop to check and see if his feelings had root, or were based in fact. He just let his emotions run his life.


message 44: by [deleted user] (new)

Truly wrote: "He may have thought that the world was filled with much resentment, but he also resented the world. It's not that my heart is cold, and therefore incapable of feeling empathy towards someone who is..."

Marisa wrote: "I am currently a teenager and I absolutely adore this book! I reread it at least 3 times a year. I guess that is just me though considering no one seems to be a fan."

should we really live not according to our emotions? many of us keep trying to fool ourselves and we almost never do things we want to do... perhaps reading good books, skipping school and going on a random trip to New York. Drinking, smoking, talking to prostitutes.
the world has always been a struggle- wars, family, religion, tradition. most of us never even truly indulge in anything- most of us exist in this perpetual circular motion of commonplaceness. "that David Copperfield kind of crap".
So let's just keep being machines of the human system.Let us be controlled and guaranteed material values. let us follow anyone and anything but ourselves. Let us devour nature and ourselves.

"My life is spent in one long effort to escape from the commonplaces of existence"-

Arthur Conan Doyle


Kimberly Jamesepowell wrote: "I found Holden to be so annoying that, for years, I couldn't get more than thirty or so pages into the book before putting it down. But after I became a high school English teacher at age 50 I felt..."

If you're anything like me when I read it you'll only find him to be an insufferable brat no matter how many times you read it :) There are too many other books out there that need reading. I do however always enjoy the debates this book causes. It definitely evokes some powerful emotions in people be it love or hate but I've never heard anyone say "meh, it was ok"
When it comes to this book I agree with the kids from Southpark haha not only was he completely irritating but the story was dull.


message 46: by Tru (new) - rated it 2 stars

Tru E.N. wrote: "Truly wrote: "He may have thought that the world was filled with much resentment, but he also resented the world. It's not that my heart is cold, and therefore incapable of feeling empathy towards ..."

I'm confused as to how being completely ruled by one's emotions, and therefore making reckless and sometimes foolish decisions, and never ever following your heart and becoming a sheep are the only options for life. I hope that is not what you meant to say.

It seems you interpreted my words in a very extreme fashion. I simply meant to say that one should not be completely ruled by their emotions, and completely self involved, the way Holden is.
Following your heart, making your own choices, and living for yourself are amazing and wonderful parts of life. That doesn't mean I'm going to walk around constantly letting my emotions dictate my actions, regardless of the repercussions, simply because I am not mature enough to control myself. XD


message 47: by Yulia (new) - rated it 1 star

Yulia It took me a while to finish the novel, and i do not really see why this novel is considered a classic in any way. The main character Holden was irrating more or less, but that is my opinion. :D


message 48: by [deleted user] (last edited Mar 28, 2012 06:34AM) (new)

Any conforming individual uses age as an insult and explanation for one's actions against the system. Many fail to see further than age and therefore ignore the meaning. Perhaps instinctively.
"Unruly boys who will not grow, they must be taken in hand..."


Steven Can it not be pure gold about a whiny teenager?


message 50: by Tru (new) - rated it 2 stars

Tru E.N. wrote: "Any conforming individual uses age as an insult and explanation for one's actions against the system. Many fail to see further than age and therefore ignore the meaning. Perhaps instinctively.
"Unr..."

Are you honestly trying to say that age does not bring wisdom towards self control and learning how to deal with things without letting your emotions completely control you? Hehe. You must be one of those unruly people who just do whatever they want, regardless of the consequences. Don't worry, you'll learn. :3


« previous 1 3 4 5
back to top