PDA

View Full Version : The Catcher in the Rye



razz
06-04-2009, 05:58 AM
-

flaggwalkstheline
06-04-2009, 06:15 AM
Catcher in the Rye, written by J.D. Salinger, is considered one of the most influential books of the 20th century. And it seems, we all want to know why.

I personally, am having many difficulties in getting into this book, so for now, I will post questions asked by fellow members (though paraphrased)
If anyone else has questions to add, PM them to me, and I will add them to this first post.

Member Questions:

1. How did you feel about the writing style of the book?

2. For what reason is this book so "hyped"?

3. Why do you think this book has become a modern classic?

expect more to come :)

1 I loved it, I adore this book

2 Holden is the first character of his kind, the wild antisocial young crazy person, he sets the archetype for characters like Gilbert Grape and Tyler Dirden

3 Because everyone who reads it finds something in it they identify with

juliebcreative
06-04-2009, 07:29 AM
I honestly believe that you need to read this book while you're in high school...or that age or whatever. If I read it now, I don't think it would have the same impact.

mae
06-05-2009, 04:52 AM
The style is half the point. I love literature with original writing styles (Palahniuk, Foer).

candy
06-06-2009, 04:52 AM
I am flabbergasted that you guys like this book?
i hated it with a passion, (not very often i can say that about a book either)

1; i found the writing style to be awful, very lazy with overuse of words. i understand it was supposed to be written from the young mans point of view, but i found the whole style boring and irritating

2; i have no idea why this book is so hyped, the only thing i can think of is the people that have supposedly read it turned out to be infamous for the wrong reasons. i certainly wont be recommending it to anyone

3: ?god knows because i dont

i understand the whole 'different writing style' and i loved a clockwork orange for that, this book however, didn't have a style, it just repeated itself (much like me in this post)but this book didnt even have a story line. i cant even say i disliked holden, i just couldn't work myself up to care for him in any way.

the reason i hated the book, was i felt that i had wasted time reading it. i can honestly read any book and 99% of the time come away thinking i have got a least something from them. but this book just seemed to plod on and on and on. and for all that didn't actually get anywhere in the end.

i am honestly at a loss as to why it is billed as a 'classic of our time' and i am hoping someone can enlighten me?

flaggwalkstheline
06-06-2009, 05:20 AM
i am honestly at a loss as to why it is billed as a 'classic of our time' and i am hoping someone can enlighten me?

because Holden Caulfield is the penultimate angry young futureless rebel and most people can identify with him either because they remember feeling like that or (in my case) still feel like that
the book was banned because of its foul language (which is actually not so bad at all) but the real reason it got in so much trouble was because of the way it presents a young man who is completely at odds with society in such a compelling manner that it unnerved the powers that be

candy
06-06-2009, 05:37 AM
He didn't really strike me as a rebel though, more that he was very ill and seemed to be suffering from depression. with the 'i didn't feel like it' it just seemed like he had no energy and all his actions to me pointed to someone who wasn't setting out to be a rebel - it all seemed more like a cry for help.

Seymour_Glass
06-06-2009, 06:03 AM
Well, being in high school, I'm gonna say that Holden Caufield is a distillation of something in me.

flaggwalkstheline
06-06-2009, 06:41 AM
Well, being in high school, I'm gonna say that Holden Caufield is a distillation of something in me.

I'm outta highschool n I feel the same way

Ka-mai
06-06-2009, 04:41 PM
My dad maintains that this book got famous because it was the first book to use the word "fuck." I'm not sure if he's right on that or not, but it wouldn't surprise me in the least. There is nothing interesting about this book at all. Just a whiny kid. Big deal. I mean, I'm more in touch with my childhood and teen years than a lot of people I know, and I don't think I would have enjoyed this then, either. I would have been like "shut the fuck up and get a life, Holden." While I'm sure we thought alike somewhat, why on earth would I want to read about teen angst when I was surrounded by it 24/7?

I just don't get it. I'd need a reread to make a more coherent rant, but that's what I have off the top of my head.

BROWNINGS CHILDE
06-06-2009, 07:14 PM
1. How did you feel about the writing style of the book? I found the writing style to be tiresome at best. Teen angst does not mean that one must repeat the same 10 words over and over and over and over and over and over and over. Even my teenage daughter, who seems to find an adjective that she likes and begins using it to describe every situation much to my dismay, can mix it up a little more.

I think that this excerpt sums up the writing style pretty well:

pp: 81-82. "I think if you don't really like a girl, you shouldn't horse around with her at all, and if you do like her, then you're supposed to like her face, and if you like her face, you ought to be careful about doing crumby stuff to it, like squirting water all over it. It's really too bad that so much crumby stuff is a lot of fun sometimes. Girls aren't too much help, either, when you start trying not to get too crumby, when you start trying not to spoil anything really good. I knew this one girl, acouple of years ago, that was even crumbier than I was. Boy, was she crumby! We had a lot of fun, though, for a while, in a crumby way.

That said, the writing did not completely ruin the book for me. Not every book I read has to be beautifully written prose. I mean, hey, I like Koontz.

2. For what reason is this book so "hyped"? At a loss to answer this question. I dont think a similar book would have the same success today. The book reminded me of "The Sun Also Rises" by Hemingway. Not, of course, in the vernacular, but in the style. Much of both of these books are disconnected ramblings about this bar or that bar, without much attention to plot. At the end, I didn't hate either book, I just felt myself wondering what was the point.

3. Why do you think this book has become a modern classic? I think that it is an easy story to identify with. Even though I don't like the writing style, I saw much of myself (as a teen) in the character of Holden. This made it an enjoyable read despite its lack of a compelling storyline or poetic prose.

Razz, I will be sending you some questions soon.

flaggwalkstheline
06-06-2009, 08:35 PM
I think one thing about this book illustrated by our various comments is this: either you get it or you dont and if you dont get, you wont

Girlystevedave
06-06-2009, 10:36 PM
I think I may do a re-read of this book since it's been a few years since I read it. I don't remember it impacting me much at the time, but I want to see how I feel another time around. Maybe it just wasn't it's "time" for me then. :orely:


Edit: Could I have used the word "time": any more up there? :cyclops:

razz
06-07-2009, 05:29 AM
questions updated

Jean
06-07-2009, 07:05 AM
1. How did you feel about the writing style of the book? It's the only redeeming feature of this book I've been able to find. I always recommend it to my students when I want them to clearly understand that one doesn't have to know a lot of words: one can always do with a hundred or so.

2. For what reason is this book so "hyped"?


Holden is the first character of his kind, the wild antisocial young crazy person

3. Why do you think this book has become a modern classic?

As ka-mai's father suggested, the word "fuck" must have had a lot to do with this.


Because everyone who reads it finds something in it they identify with
No, not everyone. The only two characters that disgust me more than him (of those I am supposed to fucking sympathize with, I mean) are Alex (A Clockwork Orange) and that guy from Rage. Well, at least master Caulfield didn't kill anybody... yet... but he surely paved the way.

4. If you were to perform a psychoanalysis of Holden, what would your diagnosis be? I wouldn't have the patience, I loathe him way too much. Rich overfed kid syndrome could be an option.


shut the fuck up and get a life, Holden

5. What words of wisdom, if any, did you think that Holden provided?

None.

6. How do you think the title relates to Holden as a character?

In no way. Should he become the "catcher", he would immediately have become bored and started finding fault with those poor kids like he already has with the rest of mankind.

7. Why is Holden so afraid of phony people?

Obviously, because he is a big phony himself.

I'll elaborate later, when I'm through with my reread.

Jean
06-07-2009, 07:21 AM
A poll has been added, the same as in the previous two cases.

candy
06-07-2009, 07:32 AM
a poll:huglove: i'm a sucker for a poll
now you all have to guess how i voted:wtf:

jayson
06-07-2009, 07:43 AM
i'm a sucker for a poll

It's just not within me to resist saying "that's what she said" about this. :rolleyes:

candy
06-07-2009, 07:49 AM
:rofl::rofl:

sarajean
06-07-2009, 07:54 AM
:lol:

nice, jayson.

it has been years since i read this book (at least 15), and while i remember being kind of okay with it, i liked salinger's other work better. my mom absolutely HATED it when i had her read it, though. similar to candy's reaction up there.

Ka-mai
06-07-2009, 09:54 AM
pp: 81-82. "I think if you don't really like a girl, you shouldn't horse around with her at all, and if you do like her, then you're supposed to like her face, and if you like her face, you ought to be careful about doing crumby stuff to it, like squirting water all over it. It's really too bad that so much crumby stuff is a lot of fun sometimes. Girls aren't too much help, either, when you start trying not to get too crumby, when you start trying not to spoil anything really good. I knew this one girl, acouple of years ago, that was even crumbier than I was. Boy, was she crumby! We had a lot of fun, though, for a while, in a crumby way.

:rofl: I forgot how much he used that fucking word. Every time he said it I thought about green bean casserole, which has crumbs on top.

Honestly, in regards to what Jean said, I think I identified more with, and found more likeable, Charlie from Rage than Holden. I mean, Holden was just like "blah blah blah" the whole time, but Charlie had legitimate fucked up life problems that made him snap along with a probable mental illness, he wasn't just whining about whatever he felt like. And his little sit-in with the students actually seemed to have a positive impact on them in certain ways (like that chick who never bathed got help from the other girls, etc.), which I think is more productive than anything Holden did. I guess what I'm trying to say is, Holden talked the talk, but Charlie walked the walk. Or something. Fuck. I'm ranting. :lol:

turtlex
06-07-2009, 10:11 AM
Just a quick note, I'll reply more later - the thing to remember about Catcher is that you're reading, basically, the inner voice of a kid. There's not going to be a huge vocabulary and lots of emoting. It's Holden's own inner-dialog.

razz
06-07-2009, 11:58 AM
It may be rather hard for me to finish this book, since most of my reading time is now devoted to reading up on driving. I'll do my best, but no promises. Either way, this thread will still be here to comment in the future.

also, too keep at least the illusion of a coherent system, I have posted a thread for book #4

valtr0n
06-07-2009, 01:59 PM
I liked it.

I don't get the hatred or dislike for any book. It's like being mad at a chocolate sundae.

Just because you didn't "get it" or it didn't appeal to you doesn't mean it's a bad book. It just means that it's not for you. Books work like music. Different music speaks to different people. Maybe if you'd read it at some other point in time, or if you read it at some future point in time, it'll speak to you in way's you missed the first time. This happens with literature. You've got to be in the right frame of mind sometimes.

And I do think Holden wants to be a "catcher." He realizes that it's too late for him, his mind is already corrupted, but he still wants to save other children from his fate. He's a good kid. He's just a confused kid. I think he represents the best and worst in all of us.

mae
06-07-2009, 02:36 PM
I think that this excerpt sums up the writing style pretty well:

pp: 81-82. "I think if you don't really like a girl, you shouldn't horse around with her at all, and if you do like her, then you're supposed to like her face, and if you like her face, you ought to be careful about doing crumby stuff to it, like squirting water all over it. It's really too bad that so much crumby stuff is a lot of fun sometimes. Girls aren't too much help, either, when you start trying not to get too crumby, when you start trying not to spoil anything really good. I knew this one girl, acouple of years ago, that was even crumbier than I was. Boy, was she crumby! We had a lot of fun, though, for a while, in a crumby way.


I find repetition is a great writing tool. To each his own, I guess. Here, I think, it works to a great effect.

BROWNINGS CHILDE
06-07-2009, 06:49 PM
I think that this excerpt sums up the writing style pretty well:

pp: 81-82. "I think if you don't really like a girl, you shouldn't horse around with her at all, and if you do like her, then you're supposed to like her face, and if you like her face, you ought to be careful about doing crumby stuff to it, like squirting water all over it. It's really too bad that so much crumby stuff is a lot of fun sometimes. Girls aren't too much help, either, when you start trying not to get too crumby, when you start trying not to spoil anything really good. I knew this one girl, acouple of years ago, that was even crumbier than I was. Boy, was she crumby! We had a lot of fun, though, for a while, in a crumby way.


I find repetition is a great writing tool. To each his own, I guess. Here, I think, it works to a great effect.


I think that repetition is a crumby writing tool.

Or maybe its just that I think Holden is a tool.

Brice
06-07-2009, 07:29 PM
My dad maintains that this book got famous because it was the first book to use the word "fuck." I'm not sure if he's right on that or not, but it wouldn't surprise me in the least. There is nothing interesting about this book at all. Just a whiny kid. Big deal. I mean, I'm more in touch with my childhood and teen years than a lot of people I know, and I don't think I would have enjoyed this then, either. I would have been like "shut the fuck up and get a life, Holden." While I'm sure we thought alike somewhat, why on earth would I want to read about teen angst when I was surrounded by it 24/7?

I just don't get it. I'd need a reread to make a more coherent rant, but that's what I have off the top of my head.

Sarah: The first use of the word fuck (that I can track down) was in a manuscript from 1475 "They, that are the monks of Ely, they are not in Heaven because they fuck the wives of Ely." Many books used it between then and The Catcher In The Rye.

BROWNINGS CHILDE
06-07-2009, 10:02 PM
1. If you were to perform a psychoanalysis of Holden, what would your diagnosis be? I think holden displays traits of several psychological disorders. Bipolar disorder seems to fit him the best, as he is always saying he is depressed. Much of the stimuli for his depression also seems, to me, trivial. This depression is mixed with periods of "mania" where he is restless and spontaneous. Spending sprees, increased sexual drive, distractability, drug abuse, and poor judment are just a few of the other characteristics that he displays that are consistent with bipolar disorder.
Holden also displays many of the traits that are associated with ADHD or Attention Deficit and Hyperactivity Disorder. He is easily distracted by seemingly irrelevant stimuli. He seems unable to complete a task. Poor ability to adhere to social mores. Always on the go. etc.

2. What words of wisdom, if any, did you think that Holden provided? Surprisingly, I caught myself several times thinking that Holden had said something with a bit of truth:

1. 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 “Fuck you” right under your nose.

2. Goddamn money. It always ends up making you blue as hell.

3. You take a guy like Morrow that’s always snapping their towel at people’s asses- really trying to hurt somebody with is- they don’t just stay a rat while they’re a kid. They stay a rat their whole life.

4. The more expensive a school is, the more crooks it has.

5. If you do something too good then, after a while, if you don’t watch it, you start showing off.

6. If a girl looks swell when she meets you, who gives a damn if she’s late?



3. How do you think the title relates to Holden as a character?
I felt like there were many times in the book where Holden acted the part of "The Catcher" or at least when he showed an uncommon empathy and consideration for others.
1. The donation to the Nuns.
2. His interaction with his sister.
3. His generosity with his money (almost to a fault)
4. Loaning Stradlater his coat and writing his paper for him.
5. When he cries because Pheobe gave him her money.
6. He stops making sexual advances when a girl says no.

4. Why is Holden so afraid of phony people? Holden wants people to fit into nice neat catergories. He can't cope with people acting outside of his perceptions of their role. His use of the word is not reserved for those who act insincere. And in my opinion, when Holden uses the word so extensively to describe individuals whom he believes are acting superficially, he succeeds only in showing that his own perceptions of other is superficial.

Ka-mai
06-09-2009, 02:39 PM
My dad maintains that this book got famous because it was the first book to use the word "fuck." I'm not sure if he's right on that or not, but it wouldn't surprise me in the least. There is nothing interesting about this book at all. Just a whiny kid. Big deal. I mean, I'm more in touch with my childhood and teen years than a lot of people I know, and I don't think I would have enjoyed this then, either. I would have been like "shut the fuck up and get a life, Holden." While I'm sure we thought alike somewhat, why on earth would I want to read about teen angst when I was surrounded by it 24/7?

I just don't get it. I'd need a reread to make a more coherent rant, but that's what I have off the top of my head.

Sarah: The first use of the word fuck (that I can track down) was in a manuscript from 1475 "They, that are the monks of Ely, they are not in Heaven because they fuck the wives of Ely." Many books used it between then and The Catcher In The Rye.

I meant more like, a book that a significant amount of people read within the past 100 years, but I get your point.

Jean
06-15-2009, 10:09 PM
I liked it.

I don't get the hatred or dislike for any book. It's like being mad at a chocolate sundae. I rather like the book in question, though solely because of the way it is written, which I find thoroughly entertaining; from any other point of view, I think I can say that I hate it. I don't believe books are akin to chocolate sundae or any other stuff we consume - if anything (which I doubt, because they constitute a phenomenon of their own), they may be compared to people we meet along the way and who may or may not influence us, deep or not, in this or that way - and thus can be loved or hated or treated with indifference; they, like people, can be friends, enemies, teachers, lovers, war criminals, corruptors, or murderers.

Roni
06-16-2009, 09:18 AM
I think that the plot could have been interresting if it wasn't so ful of repetitions (even though, sometimes it can be a useful tool) and never ending sentences. The rythm is somewhat tiring and at the end, you do wonder if it did worth it.
I've only read a lame french translated version, though.

candy
06-16-2009, 10:35 AM
I think one thing about this book illustrated by our various comments is this: either you get it or you dont and if you dont get, you wont

i just think its a shame that any book has to be 'got' and if you dont 'get' it your not one of the cool gang. one of the things i love about steve king is the broad spectrum of people who like him.

ps - flagg i love your spoiler tag sig:panic:




I don't get the hatred or dislike for any book. It's like being mad at a chocolate sundae.

.

i think i was more frustrated, as i really wanted to like it, i had heard so much about this that i was expected a really good sit down with a mug of tea and to read by lamp light.

i felt that it was badly written and i understand the whole concept of supposedly being written by a teenager - but a) i never spoke like that so i can not connect to it and b) it was still badly written and worded, if the whole point of this books popularity is that its a teenage rant, then surely any teenager can pick up a pen and right a few pages of how life is crap?

and some people do get mad a chocolate sundae


I think that the plot could have been interresting if it wasn't so ful of repetitions (even though, sometimes it can be a useful tool) and never ending sentences. The rythm is somewhat tiring and at the end, you do wonder if it did worth it.
I've only read a lame french translated version, though.

dont worry :huglove: i have a feeling that nothin was lost in translation

Woofer
06-16-2009, 01:54 PM
I couldn't bring myself to read it in HS and I couldn't bring myself to read it for the book club. I am a bad assistant book club person.

*wolfblush*

razz
06-16-2009, 02:00 PM
could be worse, I'm trying to head this book club, and I am having trouble plowing through...

Woofer
06-16-2009, 02:07 PM
:huglove:

Ka-mai
06-17-2009, 06:12 PM
I think one thing about this book illustrated by our various comments is this: either you get it or you dont and if you dont get, you wont

i just think its a shame that any book has to be 'got' and if you dont 'get' it your not one of the cool gang. one of the things i love about steve king is the broad spectrum of people who like him.

ps - flagg i love your spoiler tag sig:panic:




I don't get the hatred or dislike for any book. It's like being mad at a chocolate sundae.

.

i think i was more frustrated, as i really wanted to like it, i had heard so much about this that i was expected a really good sit down with a mug of tea and to read by lamp light.

i felt that it was badly written and i understand the whole concept of supposedly being written by a teenager - but a) i never spoke like that so i can not connect to it and b) it was still badly written and worded, if the whole point of this books popularity is that its a teenage rant, then surely any teenager can pick up a pen and right a few pages of how life is crap?

and some people do get mad a chocolate sundae


I think that the plot could have been interresting if it wasn't so ful of repetitions (even though, sometimes it can be a useful tool) and never ending sentences. The rythm is somewhat tiring and at the end, you do wonder if it did worth it.
I've only read a lame french translated version, though.

dont worry :huglove: i have a feeling that nothin was lost in translation

I completely agree with this. I just hate when people get pretentious with me, saying things like "well, you just don't understand." Look, I'm well-educated, intelligent, and I read on a regular basis. If I have to have more than that to "understand" the book, I think the book has issues.

I'm not saying this about you guys or even this book in particular, it's just a behavior that I've come across a lot that bugs the hell out of me.

I also share candy's problem where, I wanted to like this book, a lot of people I know think very highly of this book, and I was excited about reading it. And it wasn't even "oh, they overhyped it, but it was still okay," it was "...what the hell was that? I complain all the time and I'm not considered literary genius." :sigh:

turtlex
06-18-2009, 12:46 AM
I love the various opinions that have been expressed here.

Personally, I do think this book is a classic and I love the cadence and tempo of the writing.

Basically, we have a confused teenager, who is absolutely terrified that he's turning into/going to become the one thing he hates most in the world ( ie - Phoney People ).

I don't think there's any secret to the writing - it's Holden's inner voice and to me, it reads like a teenager. I love that about it. On the same hand though, I can see where some people feel it's a little, I don't know, remedial, I guess.

When I first read this book, it was given to me by my Honors English teacher after we'd just read Salinger's 9 Stories. He had spoken about the book in class, sort of in passing, and had made the comment that "it's a book all young men should read". He then proceeded to get me my own copy and give it to me - telling me that "not only young men should read it" and that I'd enjoy it too. I loved it then - because I totally recall having that inner-dialogue myself, about the school, the people around me, my family, etc. Not the exact dialogue, of course, but an interior conversation. The book spoke to me, to that part of me.

candy
06-18-2009, 10:17 AM
I completely agree with this. I just hate when people get pretentious with me, saying things like "well, you just don't understand." Look, I'm well-educated, intelligent, and I read on a regular basis. If I have to have more than that to "understand" the book, I think the book has issues.

I'm not saying this about you guys or even this book in particular, it's just a behavior that I've come across a lot that bugs the hell out of me.

I also share candy's problem where, I wanted to like this book, a lot of people I know think very highly of this book, and I was excited about reading it. And it wasn't even "oh, they overhyped it, but it was still okay," it was "...what the hell was that? I complain all the time and I'm not considered literary genius." :sigh:

:couple:i was starting to feel quite alone

Kidd Ikarus
06-18-2009, 10:54 AM
Or maybe its just that I think Holden is a tool.

:clap:

Brice
06-18-2009, 04:21 PM
I think one thing about this book illustrated by our various comments is this: either you get it or you dont and if you dont get, you wont

i just think its a shame that any book has to be 'got' and if you dont 'get' it your not one of the cool gang. one of the things i love about steve king is the broad spectrum of people who like him.

ps - flagg i love your spoiler tag sig:panic:




I don't get the hatred or dislike for any book. It's like being mad at a chocolate sundae.

.

i think i was more frustrated, as i really wanted to like it, i had heard so much about this that i was expected a really good sit down with a mug of tea and to read by lamp light.

i felt that it was badly written and i understand the whole concept of supposedly being written by a teenager - but a) i never spoke like that so i can not connect to it and b) it was still badly written and worded, if the whole point of this books popularity is that its a teenage rant, then surely any teenager can pick up a pen and right a few pages of how life is crap?

and some people do get mad a chocolate sundae


I think that the plot could have been interresting if it wasn't so ful of repetitions (even though, sometimes it can be a useful tool) and never ending sentences. The rythm is somewhat tiring and at the end, you do wonder if it did worth it.
I've only read a lame french translated version, though.

dont worry :huglove: i have a feeling that nothin was lost in translation

I completely agree with this. I just hate when people get pretentious with me, saying things like "well, you just don't understand." Look, I'm well-educated, intelligent, and I read on a regular basis. If I have to have more than that to "understand" the book, I think the book has issues.




Maybe "you don't understand" comes across as condescending or pretentious, but sometimes with all those things you just need different perspectives or you may be at a point in your life where you don't "get" something, yet at some other point you will or might.

soylentjillian
06-18-2009, 04:43 PM
I have a random thought to add. It frustrates me a lot... there is an anime, Ghost in the Shell, and there is a villain of sorts called the Laughing Man. His slogan is "I thought what I would do was, I'd pretend like I was one of those deaf mutes." That's what Holden says to himself on the bus, I believe somewhere around the time he was reminiscing about an ex's cone-shaped bra, although I could be wrong. It annoys me to see people arguing that this quote is specifically from an anime and saying something like, "oh, well, books are dumb and although this sentence is a homage to an amazing book I'm going to pretend like it's something clever that I can pass in notes to my best friends so they think I'm deep!" :shoot:

Sorry.

I love this book because I love the sort of stream of consciousness writing that is evident. Of course, it's not truly that because it's not disjointed thoughts and emotions, such as is displayed in T.S. Eliot's The Wastelands or something. It's a narrative but it still follows that stream of consciousness, the inner monologue. It is my favorite sort of thing to read because of the reality of it... it's just one gorgeous rambling of fleeting thoughts and ideas that have no bearing on the workings of the universe...

From T.S. Eliot's The Love Song of J. Alfred Prufrock (http://www.bartleby.com/198/1.html)

And indeed there will be time
To wonder, “Do I dare?” and, “Do I dare?”
Time to turn back and descend the stair,
With a bald spot in the middle of my hair—
[They will say: “How his hair is growing thin!”]
My morning coat, my collar mounting firmly to the chin,
My necktie rich and modest, but asserted by a simple pin—
[They will say: “But how his arms and legs are thin!”]
Do I dare
Disturb the universe?
In a minute there is time
For decisions and revisions which a minute will reverse.

Basically, the reason I think of this is because when you look at the thoughts and decisions of another person, they're not important. Disturbing the universe and climbing stairs (later in the poem he wonders if he dares eat a peach, and places it on the same level of disturbing the universe) are very different issues, yet they have the same weight. Therefore, humanity's protests against the flow of the world and their wonderings are futile and pointless to everyone but themselves. That, to me, is the point of Catcher in the Rye.

candy
06-21-2009, 01:11 AM
saw this on the news web this morning
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/entertainment/arts_and_culture/8107222.stm

thought some of you guys may be interested

BROWNINGS CHILDE
06-21-2009, 01:44 AM
I am not sure to what extent an author has legal rights to their characters. It seems if this lawsuit is legitimate, then I think Mel Brooks owes George Lucas some money for Spaceballs. If the character in this new book is not named Holden Caufield, I'm not sure that there is a case. I am not sure there is a legitimate case even if the name is the same. I mean, if I want to write a story and name my lead character Paul Sheldon, I am not sure SK could do anything about it.

candy
06-21-2009, 02:02 AM
i'm not too sure tbh
look at the whole harry potter jk rowling court case, when that chappy tried to release an dictionary or something or other. I may be mistaken but i think she won.

apparantley the character is called mr c,oh my god, salinger could sue me too!!! but the story is told from his point of view much like catcher in the rye, and he goes to new york and he finishes near the carasel and he rants a lot. reading between the lines, its this plotline as well as the character that salinger is having the problem with. which i can understand, if your going to do a rip off of a character at least try and have an original plot line

BROWNINGS CHILDE
06-21-2009, 02:51 AM
True...and I'm certainly not defending this hack. I just wonder how the courts will decide.

Mattrick
04-29-2013, 03:54 AM
Since I'm re-reading it, I'll re-answer these questions when I am done if my answers vary.

1. How did you feel about the writing style of the book?

It's wonderful. If you were to read it aloud it would flow off the tongue effortlessly, I know it flows in my mind. Though it consists of a lot of prattling, the prattling gives is what gives the narrative it's character and thus gives Holden his character. It's quite humourous the way Holden describes not only other people but how he feels about other people, because so much of his irritation is held within, we can only imagine how vitriolic a character he would be if he were less close-mouthed.

2. For what reason is this book so "hyped"?

I'm not really sure about any hype the book has. I just think it's a quintessential read for anyone, whether they will love it or hate it.

3. Why do you think this book has become a modern classic?

It's a sign of the times. Catcher In The Rye is such a sign of it's time, yet it is still socially relevant in modern times.


4. If you were to perform a psychoanalysis of Holden, what would your diagnosis be?

Holden Caulfield is endlessly empathetic. This empathy makes him constantly downtrodden. Though he will express great irritation and agitation at other people and point out all the phony, terrible or ugly things about theme, he always expressed pity for them. He has a rare gift of understand humanity, for understand why people are the way they are. Ackley kid annoys the hell out of him, he describes him as a lonely, envious, spiteful, ugly and annoying yet at the end of this chapter he says he truly feels sorry for him.

He's spent most of his life experiencing little strife - he's not stupid, he's not ugly, he's not overweight, he's not poor but he's helplessly empty. He finds no fulfillment in wealth or advantage. He does not try at school, he just simply doesn't care. He doesn't like the people, he doesn't like the teachers and I do not feel the work challengers or inspires him. Holden Caulfield is Dysthymic, or perhaps since I'm Dysthymic I merely see that in his character, I can relate to his perspective on the world because in a lot of ways, I believe he is right or 'on to something' at the very least.

Holden is endlessly frustrated, as many youths are, especially young men. Young men are defined by what they do and Holden doesn't do anything. He is lacking in ambition but he's overflowing with passion. He thinks and speaks with fervency, he engages people with zeal but never gets the same response back. This leaves him feeling alienated from the people around him.


5. What words of wisdom, if any, did you think that Holden provided?

See question 7.

6. How do you think the title relates to Holden as a character?

It shows his emapthy. He idolized youth because he feels life ends in adolescence, when the ways of society overtake the whimsical innocence and honesty of life. He wants to by someone that catches children, who are running through the rye, not sure what is on the other side - the other side is empty, and only leads to death - and that the real beauty of life lies in the rye, when you don't look in front of you, and you can't see around you...he wishes he could protect what makes youth so special, keep it alive so that they never lose it, as he did.

7. Why is Holden so afraid of phony people?

I don't like the phrasing of this, he's not afraid of phony people at all...he pities them, in fact, he's so saddened by them it makes him miserable. He sees his future in these people and that as life goes on, he will only feel increased separation from the people. Already at his young age he finds little in common with people. If he fears phony people in any sense, it's that he fears becoming one of them because that would to be empty, to be vapid.

Holden's journey in the novel is he is trying to find something real. He tries to be grown up; he goes to bars, he talks to women - not girls but women. He tries on being an adult and it makes him miserable, so he drinks. All he wants is to have a real conversation with someone. He goes all over New York and is unable to find one. He's so frusterated and angry that this is what life has to offer.

However, in the final chapter when Holden is with his little sister, he (I believe from my remembrance) has an epiphany - that he just had a real conversation, and it fills him with tremendous joy. Through all his schools, all his traversing of New York City and trying on the shoes he's wear in life he didn't have a real conversation until he went home. The only people really capable of real conversations are children, because their world is so large and full of possibility and hope - that it is through youth and the future that those that age draw hope and promise from, and if we can remember that, harness that, it can be possible to draw purpose from life...even if the only purpose of life is to ensure life and happiness for all the children who are yet to come.


I think the book is generally misunderstood, because Holden is misunderstood, but he's supposed to be misunderstood, because he is. In many ways I am a lot like Holden Caulfield, sometimes eerily. Hell, I even grew up with an Ackley Kid so I can perfectly both understand his irritation with Ackley and his pity for him. I suppose someone's ability to relate to Holden all depends on their ability to relate, empathize, pity and see the humanity that lies in their fellow human beings. As much as Holden finds everyone a phony, he never takes away their right for existing and tries his best to respect them, even if they do annoy the hell out of him. The book is profound because it forces is you look past his annoying, prattling, angsty, venting and see the humanity in Holden. Inside all of his complaining is a pure heart and he does a many good deeds and favours for people. Personally, I wish there were more Holden Caulfields in the world, it might be a more enjoyable place.

stkmw02
04-29-2013, 05:37 AM
Interesting thread... and some very good points!

I thoroughly enjoyed this book when I read it "too soon" on my own, but found it to be much less impressive when it was required reading in school. I think the major flaw of the book is that so much pressure is placed on it as a literary work... I feel a lot of people (at least in the US) are introduced to it as a means of learning about literature, which takes away from the enjoyment of the story itself. The book isn't trying to be anything monumental, but since it is often held to that higher standard it seems to fall short. The same goes for other "great" works that often over analyzed or spoon fed to young adults. It forces us to either overlook the true value of the story or too harshly judge the work.

For example, any book can be crumby... but a book that is presented as a model of literature seems more crumby even if it is only a little crumby, because we don't expect it to be crumby at all.

pathoftheturtle
04-29-2013, 11:02 AM
:orely: http://grammarist.com/spelling/crumby-crummy/ :| Huh.



The only people really capable of real conversations are children, because their world is so large and full of possibility and hope - that it is through youth and the future that those that age draw hope and promise from, and if we can remember that, harness that, it can be possible to draw purpose from life...even if the only purpose of life is to ensure life and happiness for all the children who are yet to come.Nice. Really makes you think.

RichardX
08-26-2013, 11:55 AM
Interesting to read the media reports this week of various unpublished Salinger stories including follow ups on Holden Caulfield's life. Some to be published in the next couple of years. There were rumors that Salinger continued to write up until his final days. And conflicting accounts about what he wanted done with those works. Some reported he wanted them destroyed. Now they are saying that he wanted them published at specific timeframes after his death. Regardless, if it is true that there are more Caulfield stories it's going to be quite a literary event. Given the reputation of the original book, it's going to be very difficult to satisy those fans. Which may have been a factor in his decision to stop publishing.

Jean
08-27-2013, 02:39 AM
wow, I didn't even know. Thank you!

mae
08-27-2013, 05:32 AM
wow, I didn't even know. Thank you!

Yes, indeed. I was floored yesterday and meant to post this in its own thread. Pretty mindblowing news:

https://www.abebooks.com/blog/index.php/2013/08/26/five-new-jd-salinger-novels-will-be-released/

There’s a new book about J.D. Salinger on the way – Salinger: The Private War of J.D. Salinger by David Shields and Shane Salerno is due out September 3rd. The co-authors of the new Salinger biography spent eight years completing exhaustive research, conducting countless interviews with countless people, and compiling and organizing as much information as possible about J.D. Salinger, famously one of the 20th century’s most reclusive, mysterious public figures. Many are calling it the definitive biography of Salinger, who stopped publishing in 1965, and did his best to stay out of the public eye. But more torturous for his fans than the lack of more Salinger writing wad the knowledge that the author was indeed writing, but only for himself and his own pleasure, and not making it available.

Now Salerno and Shields say claim that not only have five previously-unreleased Salinger novels been discovered, they’ve now also been verified, documented and authenticated by independent sources in the know, and are slated to be released beginning sometime in or soon after 2015.

The Salinger books would revisit “Catcher” protagonist Holden Caulfield and draw on Salinger’s World War II years and his immersion in Eastern religion. The material also would feature new stories about the Glass family of “Franny and Zooey” and other Salinger works.

Again, it must be a complicated excitement for fans – while there is no doubt the newly unearthed Salinger works will be highly sought-after and enjoyed, it’s also clear that it’s not what Salinger himself would want. Neither his son Matt nor his widow Colleen approved of Shields’ and Salerno’s book, and neither of them cooperated with the pair.

Merlin1958
08-27-2013, 08:41 PM
Catcher in the Rye, written by J.D. Salinger, is considered one of the most influential books of the 20th century. And it seems, we all want to know why.

I personally, am having many difficulties in getting into this book, so for now, I will post questions asked by fellow members (though paraphrased)
If anyone else has questions to add, PM them to me, and I will add them to this first post.

Member Questions:

1. How did you feel about the writing style of the book?

2. For what reason is this book so "hyped"?

3. Why do you think this book has become a modern classic?



More Questions!
1. If you were to perform a psychoanalysis of Holden, what would your diagnosis be?

2. What words of wisdom, if any, did you think that Holden provided?

3. How do you think the title relates to Holden as a character?

4. Why is Holden so afraid of phony people?

I have not read through the thread completely, but I feel compelled to ask, are you getting the internet to do your reading? "Catcher in the Rye", at least for mine and the previous generation is a classic "coming of age" book that may or may not be as relevant in this age. It is still, IMHO a "classic" that should be read and understood. Call me a cynic, but the premise of this thread smacks of a student cutting corners, Of course, I may (and usually am) be wrong, but I just speak my mind is all. Read the book!!!

Jean
08-28-2013, 02:29 AM
Bill, you missed the point! It's a Book Club thread, that is, we choose a book, compose questions, and answer them!

it's great to see you in this forum anyway, I would be very pleased if you contributed to any of the Book Club dead threads, or started a live one! We haven't had a Book Club discussion in ages.

Merlin1958
08-28-2013, 09:59 AM
Bill, you missed the point! It's a Book Club thread, that is, we choose a book, compose questions, and answer them!

it's great to see you in this forum anyway, I would be very pleased if you contributed to any of the Book Club dead threads, or started a live one! We haven't had a Book Club discussion in ages.

My apologies then. Carry on!!

BROWNINGS CHILDE
08-28-2013, 01:27 PM
I would love to revive the book club. Anyone?

pathoftheturtle
08-28-2013, 03:12 PM
Too busy. Book contest. Try later.

http://www.thedarktower.org/palaver/showthread.php?17542-Top-100-Novels-of-All-Time-NOMINATIONS!!!!!!

Merlin1958
08-28-2013, 05:32 PM
I would love to revive the book club. Anyone?

Sure, why not. I'm in.

Jean
08-28-2013, 09:09 PM
bears are always in

to kill two birds, I recommend to choose the next book from the obscure nominations that still have zero secondings

BROWNINGS CHILDE
08-31-2013, 06:12 PM
bears are always in

to kill two birds, I recommend to choose the next book from the obscure nominations that still have zero secondings

Excellent idea. We shall wait till the nomination round is over then.

Jean
08-31-2013, 09:44 PM
No, I think we should right now look at the ones with zeros. Maybe we can save at least one from dropping out altogether.

BROWNINGS CHILDE
08-31-2013, 10:10 PM
*goes to peruse the list*