Thread: Catcher In The Rye

I picked it up when I was like, twelve. Mind you, I was a pretty precocious little reader, but I didn't much care for it. Didn't get the whole meaning, and it seemed like a pointless, rambling rant. (I was used to comprehensive and clear-cut and decipherable-plot-points writing at that point, like James Patterson and Stephen King). But now that I am fourteen and finally GET the purpose of the book, I think I'll tackle it again. I mean, there must be SOMETHING great about it for all these people to worship it so.

There's a great thread about Catcher in the Rye in the "Books and Authors" forum.

Just FYI, in case you want to check out some more opinions : ).

Racheal

I love The Catcher in the Rye. It's likely the first piece of literature that I ever truly loved. Holden was someone I could identify with, and I just inhaled that novel, man. I read it at probably the perfect time, too. I see how it can be viewed as a long, rambling rant, but I could agree with it! It fascinated me at the time. If you don't get it, then you've probably never been in his position: appalled by the cruelty and complexity of the world. And that would be awkward, because I'm sure everyone has.

Originally Posted by Mike C

(From the Catcher thread in Books & Authors) Holden was written as an unsympathetic character

I think this is where most of the confusion about this amazing book comes from. Holden is really one of the most sympathetic characters to be found in literature.

The common thread to much of Salinger's work is his struggle with one of the toughest concepts of Zen Buddhism.

The goal of Buddhism is to totally rid yourself of ego. Of the 10 Precepts of Zen Buddhism #6 is to not discuss the faults of others, #7 is to not praise yourself while abusing others and #9 is to not indulge in anger.

If you have any hope at all of eliminating ego you just can't think of yourself as better than others. You can't love yourself or any one other more than you do the whole of mankind.

Almost every encounter Holden has with someone else, both those he likes and dislike, he's struggling with his image of them. Every phony has a silver lining and everybody he admires has a touch of phony in them. Even with Ackley, who he gives it to pretty hard, he concedes "That guy had just about everything. Sinus trouble, pimples, crumby fingernails. You had to feel a little sorry for the sonuvabitch."

He uses kids, like Phoebe, Allie and others to represent innocence, a kind of pre-ego state, and his greatest desire is to protect this in them, save them from the phoniness.

In almost all of his work there is one character who has died, gone crazy or both in pursuit of this or some analogous religious goal and I don't think its a stretch to say this represents his own personal struggle with the idea particularly in contrast with his troubled youth and wartime experiences.

He could very easily have turned this into a moral tale with Holden finding success in therapy and accepting the phonies, a golden sunrise in the distance. It might have even made the point more clearly to many readers, but it wouldn't have been true to his own experience in this, and wouldn't have rang true to us. Sounds pretty putrid actually. And here's the rub, wouldn't claiming to have an answer in that way be ego?

What I believe Salinger hoped would happen is that this book would be difficult for us because we recognize the Holden in ourselves, and that we/he is as big an asshole as anyone else in the book.

He addresses this much more directly in Franny & Zooey, as well as Semour: An Introduction. Catcher In The Rye is his most "Westernized" crack at it.

Originally Posted by Buddy Glass

if one is able to simply look past the conspiracy theories and the bullshit, you'll see that The Catcher in the Rye is nothing short of being one of the greatest novels of the 20th Century.

I read The Catcher in the Rye so many years ago. I don't remember it well. But please, will you specify what you mean by "the conspiracy theories"?

Originally Posted by A. Mann

I think this is where most of the confusion about this amazing book comes from. Holden is really one of the most sympathetic characters to be found in literature.

The common thread to much of Salinger's work is his struggle with one of the toughest concepts of Zen Buddhism.

The goal of Buddhism is to totally rid yourself of ego. Of the 10 Precepts of Zen Buddhism #6 is to not discuss the faults of others, #7 is to not praise yourself while abusing others and #9 is to not indulge in anger.

If you have any hope at all of eliminating ego you just can't think of yourself as better than others. You can't love yourself or any one other more than you do the whole of mankind.

Almost every encounter Holden has with someone else, both those he likes and dislike, he's struggling with his image of them. Every phony has a silver lining and everybody he admires has a touch of phony in them. Even with Ackley, who he gives it to pretty hard, he concedes "That guy had just about everything. Sinus trouble, pimples, crumby fingernails. You had to feel a little sorry for the sonuvabitch."

He uses kids, like Phoebe, Allie and others to represent innocence, a kind of pre-ego state, and his greatest desire is to protect this in them, save them from the phoniness.

In almost all of his work there is one character who has died, gone crazy or both in pursuit of this or some analogous religious goal and I don't think its a stretch to say this represents his own personal struggle with the idea particularly in contrast with his troubled youth and wartime experiences.

He could very easily have turned this into a moral tale with Holden finding success in therapy and accepting the phonies, a golden sunrise in the distance. It might have even made the point more clearly to many readers, but it wouldn't have been true to his own experience in this, and wouldn't have rang true to us. Sounds pretty putrid actually. And here's the rub, wouldn't claiming to have an answer in that way be ego?

What I believe Salinger hoped would happen is that this book would be difficult for us because we recognize the Holden in ourselves, and that we/he is as big an asshole as anyone else in the book.

He addresses this much more directly in Franny & Zooey, as well as Semour: An Introduction. Catcher In The Rye is his most "Westernized" crack at it.

everybody's a god damned phony.


i think you're quite right. i mean, just read Teddy and it's like seeing Salinger's mind on paper arguing with itself.

i, as sad and twisted as it is to say, can't wait till he dies. he probably has a whole library of finished and unfinished genius in his study, waiting to be released once he's gone.

My whole childhood was so awkward, and I never fit in because I was so different then everyone else, I wan't interested in sports like football and soccar, I was interested in things like art and music. I was a mediocre student, while everyone around me would freak out when they got a A- on something. I was so different that I was isolated and considered weird and I sort of stopped being social altogether. I got depressed, and even suicidal for few years during elementary school. I didn't connect with anyone, not even my parents. I couldn't talk to anyone about the way I felt. I hated the majority of everyone. They all just seemed to be so mean, so focused on being on top. When I saw a group of friends laughing over some stupid thing, just being "silly", it would anger me. When a guy would date a girl just to run up to his friends the next day and tell them about it, it would depress me. My life was absolute hell, I felt as if the world was created for everyone but me. But I felt as if I truly had a friend (I know that sounds stupid) when I read The Catcher in the Rye for the first time in ninth grade. Holden Caulfield just hit the nail right on the head. His conception of the world was so spot on; jackasses thrive to live happy and create more jackasses, while the good ones, the ones who don't pretend to be something they're not, are looked down upon and considered "punks". Holden was left to rot in a mental instution, after about two hundred and twenty pages of explanation of why he's the only sane person around. And the story was never sugarcoated. It didn't end with something dumb like Holden finally finding the perfect girl, or finally setting things right with school and his parents. No, it was a perfect portrait of reality; things don't end on a good note. The novel completely turned my world upside down. It made me stop feeling unsatisfied and dissapointed with the "innequities" of my life, and made me feel proud of them. Proud of being different, and proud of being "weird". It made me feel not like I was better than everyone, but that that everyone was just lost and I was the only person who truly knew where I was going. The Catcher in the Rye is the only book I can truly take seriously and not consider "just a book". It's more than that to me.

i, as sad and twisted as it is to say, can't wait till he dies. he probably has a whole library of finished and unfinished genius in his study, waiting to be released once he's gone.

Haha. That's probably pretty close to the truth.

Did you see he came out of his recluse-cave to sue some guy for infringing on Catcher? Someone wrote a sequel or a prequel or something and actually managed to get it published - all without Salinger's permission.

Originally Posted by Dr. Malone

Haha. That's probably pretty close to the truth.

Did you see he came out of his recluse-cave to sue some guy for infringing on Catcher? Someone wrote a sequel or a prequel or something and actually managed to get it published - all without Salinger's permission.

I'll personally off the fucker that banks on Catcher. They've already ass humped Jane Austen's corpse to death; no one is touching Holden/Salinger.

I agree with the post before mine saying that, despite the morbidness of it, I can't wait for Salinger's death. I love all of his work.

Originally Posted by Dr. Malone

Haha. That's probably pretty close to the truth.

Did you see he came out of his recluse-cave to sue some guy for infringing on Catcher? Someone wrote a sequel or a prequel or something and actually managed to get it published - all without Salinger's permission.

I did. And Colbert did quite an extraordinary report on the fiasco, parodying all of Salinger's work. My favorite Colbert moment.

And Colbert did quite an extraordinary report on the fiasco, parodying all of Salinger's work. My favorite Colbert moment.

Haha. That's actually where I heard the story in the first place. Good ol' Colbert.

I guess Norwegians (or Swedes?) aren't up on U.S. copyright law. If you're going to write a derivative work, you better make damn sure the original author has been dead for more than 70 years!

I thought that the book was good but boring. Sorry, it just felt a bit dry to me

Some schools seem to be gifted in getting students disgusted with good books, and that includes Catcher in the Rye. I've read it lately and though it's not my idea of great literature, I have enjoyed it. Books read at school should be read again a decade later, I think.

This book is amazing. Another book that was assigned to me in 10th grade, and I read it in a week. I love the story; I was also one of the only kids in that class that actually got the true meaning of the book, instead of just sitting there and crying about reading something.