What Makes You Love/Hate The Catcher in the Rye?

[irinmisfit92]

I have a really big problem. Many books initially intrigue me, but as it goes on many of them disappoint me. Very few books can actually keep me occupied until the end and I can say that I am very satisfied with the book.

I love 1984, A Thousand Splendid Suns, Let The Right One In, Handling the Undead, About A Boy, A Clockwork Orange, and Harbour (the three last ones are by the same Swedish author). Other than that, the books I've read just disappointed me like crazy.

I just recently finished The Catcher in the Rye, and I overlooked a lot of parts because I somewhat got bored of it. I understand that the themes explored are that of isolation and teenage rebellion, but after a while the book just didn't seem too compelling to me anymore. The beginning was great, but after that... I don't know. I feel the same way when reading Submarine (which was just recently adapted and went into the big screen in UK), Lolita, and even Lord of the Flies!

Is it only me who has the same problem?

[Emil Miller]

I have a really big problem. Many books initially intrigue me, but as it goes on many of them disappoint me. Very few books can actually keep me occupied until the end and I can say that I am very satisfied with the book.

I love 1984, A Thousand Splendid Suns, Let The Right One In, Handling the Undead, About A Boy, A Clockwork Orange, and Harbour (the three last ones are by the same Swedish author). Other than that, the books I've read just disappointed me like crazy.

I just recently finished The Catcher in the Rye, and I overlooked a lot of parts because I somewhat got bored of it. I understand that the themes explored are that of isolation and teenage rebellion, but after a while the book just didn't seem too compelling to me anymore. The beginning was great, but after that... I don't know. I feel the same way when reading Submarine (which was just recently adapted and went into the big screen in UK), Lolita, and even Lord of the Flies!

Is it only me who has the same problem?

That's a pretty eclectic mix of books you have there but I doubt that you are the only one who finds some of them not to your liking. Many people, if not all, have writers that they find uncongenial. I won't even bother with Catcher in the Rye as I find many teenagers boring in actuality and even more so in novels but I also found Lord of the Flies a disappointing read. I don't know anything about Submarine but Lolita, which apart from being too long, is a very good novel.

[FROADS]

I never really understood the hype surrounding this book, I always thought it was pretty average imo. TO each his own though..I just don't think Catcher in The Rye should be part of any high school's curriculum considering that there are far better books out there.

[My2cents]

It's about teen angst, The Catcher in the Rye, which is why it doesn't appeal to readers who have been around the block, so to speak. I like it in doses which is to say there was a time when I thought it was the greatest thing along with, R.E.M., a pair of Chuck Taylors, and the like.

It's actually a very good book to get young people interested in reading.

[Paulclem]

I read it when I was about 20, and I thought it was self obsessed rubbish. I wouldn't recommend it. It now also feels historical rather than reflective of today's teens.

[dfloyd]

or maybe he/she has a short attention span. As for Catcher in the Rye, I haven't read it in fifty years, but I would rather read it again than reflect on today's teenagers.

[irinmisfit92]

That's a pretty eclectic mix of books you have there but I doubt that you are the only one who finds some of them not to your liking. Many people, if not all, have writers that they find uncongenial. I won't even bother with Catcher in the Rye as I find many teenagers boring in actuality and even more so in novels but I also found Lord of the Flies a disappointing read. I don't know anything about Submarine but Lolita, which apart from being too long, is a very good novel.

Thanks :) I'm a very eclectic person in my taste for a lot of things in life.

I'm trying to bring myself to read more Asian authors. So far I've only read Haruki Murakami, Koushun Takami, and Okuda Hideo when it comes to Asian literature. I read one book by Kiran Desai and got really bored so I've not been really fond of Asian literature. I'm Asian but I don't think generally Asians have what it takes to write a book that is as good as one written by Europeans.

I think you're right. A lot of teenagers are really boring in books. Now that I think of it, the books I read mainly consists of adults as protagonists. I personally think only mangas (which I consider a form of literature as well) can actually bring teenagers into a deeper and more interesting level. People's perception of manga is really bad because the mainstream ones are usually more childish and cliched. People should look beyond that and read psychological thriller mangas that are seriously tantamount to the depth of storytelling found in many literature books.

I think Lord of the Flies is very disappointing because of the ending. It's a story with no ending in my opinion. William Golding seems to force the ending upon the great story he has made.

Submarine isn't a literary book; it's a coming-of-age novel that tells the story of a boy who thinks that he knows everything about relationships and sex, but actually he doesn't. He has mental problems and it is interesting to look at the world from his intelligent point of views full of difficult vocabularies.

Lolita is wayyyyyy too long. Honestly I don't understand why writers love to drag their stories so much when it's better to keep it nice and short. The beginning was very, very good, but after Humbert and Lolita were "together" and stuff happened it just went downhill in my opinion. I had to force myself to continue reading it, especially I already know the story (since I've watched the Stanley Kubrick-directed movie last year).


I never really understood the hype surrounding this book, I always thought it was pretty average imo. TO each his own though..I just don't think Catcher in The Rye should be part of any high school's curriculum considering that there are far better books out there.

If it is part of a school curriculum I will vomit my hearts out because I see no literary significance to it at all. If the literature department wants to explore the ideas of isolation and teenage angst & rebellion, they should look for good movies to show those ideas instead. I watched Dazed and Confused and I think it's a more realistic depiction of teenagers (especially American ones in the 1980s). Literature doesn't have to come in the form of books; movies can help as well.

I don't really like my literature text for A levels here in this country. Wuthering Heights may be good, but the characters are really annoying and my friends and I can't stand them. Richard III is indeed the simplest among the Shakespearean tragedies, but I think other villains in his plays are more interesting.


It's about teen angst, The Catcher in the Rye, which is why it doesn't appeal to readers who have been around the block, so to speak. I like it in doses which is to say there was a time when I thought it was the greatest thing along with, R.E.M., a pair of Chuck Taylors, and the like.

It's actually a very good book to get young people interested in reading.

Ahh I understand what you're trying to say. I have to agree that it can get the youths to be interested in reading since the language is very informal and colloquial. I find some of the scenes funny but there seems to be no point in it after a while. The ideas implied are there and they are good, but how Salinger writes and shows it just don't seem to blow my mind.


or maybe he/she has a short attention span. As for Catcher in the Rye, I haven't read it in fifty years, but I would rather read it again than reflect on today's teenagers.

I think Catcher in the Rye is too simplistic because teenagers may be angsty, but the more angsty they are, the more hurt they are. I know someone like Holden in my school (who flunks everything except English literature, yes), but as a teenage rebel myself I think there should be more depth to teenagers' lives. Trust me, if you ponder about teenagers' lives, you realise how stupid the world we live in today really is.

I've seen the British TV series Skins and I think it's a more realistic portrayal of teenagers. So many teenagers live in very cra*py family conditions right now that they turn to drugs and alcohol for help. I'm not saying that it's a good thing, and I have my own values not to go to drugs since I don't need it, but I understand the reasons why people are so desperate that they trap themselves in that kind of life.

I felt really depressed one day at school because I'm lonely and I don't fit in. My parents only seem to be concerned about fighting with one another. I know they love me, but their constant surveillance annoys me. I just want to left in peace because it is hypocritical that they say they love me and they think that fighting and cursing in front of me is "totally okay" because "they love each other and it is natural for them to fight". I wanted to leave school early and study at home, and so I had to take green slip from the general office. The elder woman was really annoying and questioned me whether I was really ill or not. She also criticized me unnecessarily and made me feel even worse. Honestly, if I lost control I could've sworn right in front of her using another language telling him to f*ck herself.

I've seen a lot of teenagers nowadays who are treated like crap and still face their lives with so much confidence. They are pressurized to do extremely well in their academics and they put through with it. In fact, some are so conservative that they don't know any other life besides pursuing academic excellence. It's really sad, and sometimes pathetic in my opinion.

I feel sad as a rebel, but I can't really do anything about my parents. In Asian societies, not all couples even have sex after they have children. My parents is definitely one of them. It feels empty being in a home like that, and in a place where you're criticized because your hair colour "is not appropriate according to your father" (happened to my sister).

Holden is too simplistic of a case, as teenagers mainly rebel because they are hurt and their parents just don't understand them no matter what.

[FROADS]

Basically, like you said, it's too simplistic..The other reason I can't understand is the fascination the book holds on some people..That whole John lennon fiasco n countless others..A recent book I read that perfectly describes that teenage-coming of age genre, has got to be Hanif Kureishi's BUddha of Suburbia..

[NiMROD]

I love Catcher in the Rye, I hate Lord of the Flies. :)

The thing I love about Catcher isn't so much the teenage angst, but that the experience to me rings true. Of growing up, especially post WWII in America. Holden's preoccupation with "phoniness" is something I still personally deal with (I'm 26 now). So much of our world is BS. I feel him coming to grips with it. Brochures for institutions that "mold" young men which are really nothing more than places to funnel the same mediocrities found everywhere else, their affluence being their primary defining characteristic. The education itself, near useless. Most of what's learned, what's deemed necessary, never gets applied. Or retained.

Resumes, networking, schooling, dress attire, manners. It's all human contrived BS, and the isolation he describes is a dividing line composed of those trivialities. When I read Catcher I felt like Salinger was lamenting that what used to happen organically has now been stripped of any color of life by routinizing the hell out of it (School, dancing, movie-going, what have you). Teenage angst as a term gives the impression that there's something wrong with the teenager. In reality though it just happens to be the age where you catch your first glimpses of the adult world and all its nonsense.

So yeah... I've read it a few times over the years.

[irinmisfit92]

Basically, like you said, it's too simplistic..The other reason I can't understand is the fascination the book holds on some people..That whole John lennon fiasco n countless others..A recent book I read that perfectly describes that teenage-coming of age genre, has got to be Hanif Kureishi's BUddha of Suburbia..

I'll try to check that out. Thanks :)


I love Catcher in the Rye, I hate Lord of the Flies. :)

The thing I love about Catcher isn't so much the teenage angst, but that the experience to me rings true. Of growing up, especially post WWII in America. Holden's preoccupation with "phoniness" is something I still personally deal with (I'm 26 now). So much of our world is BS. I feel him coming to grips with it. Brochures for institutions that "mold" young men which are really nothing more than places to funnel the same mediocrities found everywhere else, their affluence being their primary defining characteristic. The education itself, near useless. Most of what's learned, what's deemed necessary, never gets applied. Or retained.

Resumes, networking, schooling, dress attire, manners. It's all human contrived BS, and the isolation he describes is a dividing line composed of those trivialities. When I read Catcher I felt like Salinger was lamenting that what used to happen organically has now been stripped of any color of life by routinizing the hell out of it (School, dancing, movie-going, what have you). Teenage angst as a term gives the impression that there's something wrong with the teenager. In reality though it just happens to be the age where you catch your first glimpses of the adult world and all its nonsense.

So yeah... I've read it a few times over the years.

I can understand where you're coming from and I agree that Salinger has shown those deep ideas in the book, but maybe it's just what he writes that makes me kind of bored after a while.

Actually weirdly enough both as a child and teenager I don't really glimpse the adult world, I already experience it fully now because I deal with injustice everyday. I know that some people especially in the US try to retain their children's childhood and innocence (the horror of the colour pink and Barbie dolls), but here in Asia I don't really see THAT many people having really good childhoods. They're already exposed to a really crappy education system that forces them to do well in EVERY single thing. In this country I see a lot of primary school kids who are really tortured by their parents because they don't score well enough at school. I don't even recall having a childhood myself because of my parents' focus on academic achievements. I just realised that most of my book collections from my childhood are actually biographies of famous people in the form of comic books. I may be a pathetic and isolated case, but still I think so many people here also do not have the childhood that's not bull**** like the real world.

[NiMROD]

Hah I agree, the writing can be dull and since its full of 1950's slang it's that much worse.

[Emil Miller]

Thanks :) I'm a very eclectic person in my taste for a lot of things in life.

I'm trying to bring myself to read more Asian authors. So far I've only read Haruki Murakami, Koushun Takami, and Okuda Hideo when it comes to Asian literature. I read one book by Kiran Desai and got really bored so I've not been really fond of Asian literature. I'm Asian but I don't think generally Asians have what it takes to write a book that is as good as one written by Europeans.

I think you're right. A lot of teenagers are really boring in books. Now that I think of it, the books I read mainly consists of adults as protagonists. I personally think only mangas (which I consider a form of literature as well) can actually bring teenagers into a deeper and more interesting level. People's perception of manga is really bad because the mainstream ones are usually more childish and cliched. People should look beyond that and read psychological thriller mangas that are seriously tantamount to the depth of storytelling found in many literature books.

I think Lord of the Flies is very disappointing because of the ending. It's a story with no ending in my opinion. William Golding seems to force the ending upon the great story he has made.

Submarine isn't a literary book; it's a coming-of-age novel that tells the story of a boy who thinks that he knows everything about relationships and sex, but actually he doesn't. He has mental problems and it is interesting to look at the world from his intelligent point of views full of difficult vocabularies.

Lolita is wayyyyyy too long. Honestly I don't understand why writers love to drag their stories so much when it's better to keep it nice and short. The beginning was very, very good, but after Humbert and Lolita were "together" and stuff happened it just went downhill in my opinion. I had to force myself to continue reading it, especially I already know the story (since I've watched the Stanley Kubrick-directed movie last year).

I would dispute that Asian authors don't have what it takes to write books as good as Europeans if by that you mean Western literature. The Asian writers you have mentioned are being read in the West in a way that such writers have not been heretofore. The kind of nonsense that generally goes under the heading 'Post-modernism' is just another example of Western decline and there really doesn't seem much of any consequence being written in Europe. So as the US and the EU sink slowly in the West, Asia is rising in the East and this augurs well for Asian literature.
As for teenage angst, there really is no such thing, it was dreamed up by the US media and Hollywood in order to syphon off money from young people who the media dubbed teenagers during the1950s. Prior to that time, the youth didn't have much money and were more or less ignored until they became men and women who were fully earning, but in the boom years of the 50s, young people suddenly found they had more disposable income and big business, notably the entertainment and clothing industries, wanted their share of it. Knowing that young people think that the world revolves around themselves, the media ushered in the era of, and I quote: 'The crazy mixed up kid', even though there wasn't anything for them to be mixed up about.
Lots of money was made from teenagers shelling out for films such as Rebel Without a Cause and its numerous spin-offs and the mixed up kid soon became a self-fulfilling prophesy. J.D.Salinger helped launch the idea in 1951 and the rest is literary history.
I was interested to read that you saw the Kubrick version of Lolita. It came in for adverse criticism on account of it being shot in the UK because the subject matter was thought too risque for US audiences at the time.
I thought it was very well done and quite a convincing take on the novel, which is marred by the interminable journeys that Humbert and Lolita make around the US.

[prendrelemick]

I'll try to check that out. Thanks :)



I can understand where you're coming from and I agree that Salinger has shown those deep ideas in the book, but maybe it's just what he writes that makes me kind of bored after a while.

Actually weirdly enough both as a child and teenager I don't really glimpse the adult world, I already experience it fully now because I deal with injustice everyday. I know that some people especially in the US try to retain their children's childhood and innocence (the horror of the colour pink and Barbie dolls), but here in Asia I don't really see THAT many people having really good childhoods. They're already exposed to a really crappy education system that forces them to do well in EVERY single thing. In this country I see a lot of primary school kids who are really tortured by their parents because they don't score well enough at school. I don't even recall having a childhood myself because of my parents' focus on academic achievements. I just realised that most of my book collections from my childhood are actually biographies of famous people in the form of comic books. I may be a pathetic and isolated case, but still I think so many people here also do not have the childhood that's not bull**** like the real world.

First of all, I agree with you over Catcher in the Rye.

You write well, you are intellegent and eloquent, you have formed your own opinions from your own observations and experiences and you are able to express them sucessfully. Is this in spite of your education and upbringing or because of it?

The "grown up" world provides a cocoon for teenagers to rebel within. It has to be there or rebellion is impossible.

[irinmisfit92]

I would dispute that Asian authors don't have what it takes to write books as good as Europeans if by that you mean Western literature. The Asian writers you have mentioned are being read in the West in a way that such writers have not been heretofore. The kind of nonsense that generally goes under the heading 'Post-modernism' is just another example of Western decline and there really doesn't seem much of any consequence being written in Europe. So as the US and the EU sink slowly in the West, Asia is rising in the East and this augurs well for Asian literature.
As for teenage angst, there really is no such thing, it was dreamed up by the US media and Hollywood in order to syphon off money from young people who the media dubbed teenagers during the1950s. Prior to that time, the youth didn't have much money and were more or less ignored until they became men and women who were fully earning, but in the boom years of the 50s, young people suddenly found they had more disposable income and big business, notably the entertainment and clothing industries, wanted their share of it. Knowing that young people think that the world revolves around themselves, the media ushered in the era of, and I quote: 'The crazy mixed up kid', even though there wasn't anything for them to be mixed up about.
Lots of money was made from teenagers shelling out for films such as Rebel Without a Cause and its numerous spin-offs and the mixed up kid soon became a self-fulfilling prophesy. J.D.Salinger helped launch the idea in 1951 and the rest is literary history.
I was interested to read that you saw the Kubrick version of Lolita. It came in for adverse criticism on account of it being shot in the UK because the subject matter was thought too risque for US audiences at the time.
I thought it was very well done and quite a convincing take on the novel, which is marred by the interminable journeys that Humbert and Lolita make around the US.

Ahh I get it. That's interesting to take note of, thanks.

I've watched three of Kubrick's movies now - Lolita, A Clockwork Orange, and The Shining. All three were great and I'm planning to watch more soon. I caught a glimpse of Dr Strangelove but I didn't get anything and got bored so I deleted the movie from my computer. Anyway, I also feel that the original Lolita was well done and I honestly got freaked out by the psychologist who went to Humbert because of the way the lighting effects were done. That was really creepy and the relationship between Humbert and Lolita was also greatly portrayed.

[irinmisfit92]

First of all, I agree with you over Catcher in the Rye.

You write well, you are intellegent and eloquent, you have formed your own opinions from your own observations and experiences and you are able to express them sucessfully. Is this in spite of your education and upbringing or because of it?

The "grown up" world provides a cocoon for teenagers to rebel within. It has to be there or rebellion is impossible.

Thanks a lot. People call me smart because I'm the top 10% in my school, but I don't think that's the whole point. I work hard and I honestly think that my life's still pretty crappy. My grades are seriously not that good at all, and secondly my social life really, really sucks. I just can't fit in I suppose, even though at least I've known some people who've become my good friends.

Hmm that's a very difficult question to answer. :P I'm a VERY observant person - I observe everything, partly because I do it to fill the emptiness in my own life, so I try to meddle into other people's lives. My ultimate dream is to become a writer (part-time journalist and photographer I suppose) and a psychologist. I feel that who I am now is seriously because of my upbringing and my education. I got a scholarship to this country that focuses A LOT on academic excellence. Here, my full potential was exposed, and I'm one of the very few scholars who actually dare to be in the humanities stream. Most people prefer to take pragmatic sciences, but I know that I like humanities and I'm pretty decent at writing essays. It's not easy especially with English not being my mother tongue, but I manage to pull it through as a foreigner here despite all the problems that go by.

My upbringing makes me very rebellious towards my parents and how I am perceived by society makes me very critical of it, but I'm ultimately just lost. =) That's the reason why I don't deem academic excellence the most important thing in my life. Sure, good grades enable me to go to the US and be a shrink, but there's that sort of void that cannot be fulfilled. There are some people here who only care about their studies and I just don't understand why sometimes. Where I come from is full of lazy people (I am included as well at times :P) so I'm used to that laid back culture. I guess I have a double personality - a fun one that focuses on enjoying life (I'm very open when it comes to talking about sex and other things unlike some people here) and another one that's very serious and lonely.

I'm not too complicated, trust me. :D

[avid]

It's actually a very good book to get young people interested in reading.

Nah.....way over rated.

For getting boys interested in reading nothing beats Treasure Island

[Dark Muse]

I loved the book when I first read it high school and still loved it when I re-read it in honor of J.D Salinger's death.

One of the reasons why I do love the book so much is because I can personally identify with Holden. I completely agree with him that the majority of the people in the world really are just a bunch of phonies. When I first read the book it was as if Holden was speaking my own personal thoughts.

And I just love that whole sardonic edge that occurs in so many of J.D. Salinger's characters. It is like he speaks to my heart (hmmm maybe because are both or in his case was such recluses.) So perhaps we do see the world in a similar way.

There are times when I feel like I am a J.D. Saligner creation.

[Mutatis-Mutandis]

I love Catcher because I dislike Holden Caulfield (which is why many people hate it). When I read it, I was already out of my teen-angst-phase, so all signs pointed to me not liking the book, but I did. Holden is such an annoying character, but he just always strikes me as completely realistic. He's irrational, arrogant, obnoxious, and a smart-***. In other words, a perfect depiction of a teenager.

I like to read books focused on people who I don't particularly like (occasionally), if they are the right length, and I've always felt that Catcher is exactly the right length of the type of book it is. It also makes me laugh, a lot. The scene on the train when he starts lying to the lady for no real reason always cracks me up. Plus, few books I've read seem to have a more fully realized voice than Catcher's. Every time I read Catcher, I catch myself typing in the same way, which hasn't happened with any other book before.

It's actually a very good book to get young people interested in reading.

Nah.....way over rated.

Well, the fact that it has actually gotten many young people interested in reading kind of clashes with that assertion.

[qimissung]

I liked Catcher in the Rye, although it's been awhile since I've read it. I don't know why we're always trying to foist it off on teenagers. I think it's just a good book for anyone who wants to read it, although I understand that it seems to have a niche appeal because of the young age of the protagonist.

Nobody ever mentions that Holden had just lost a brother, but I think in addition to his youth that is a key element of Holden's misery and his need to make sense of the world, his feeling of loss and disconnection.

[prendrelemick]

Thanks a lot. People call me smart because I'm the top 10% in my school, but I don't think that's the whole point. I work hard and I honestly think that my life's still pretty crappy. My grades are seriously not that good at all, and secondly my social life really, really sucks. I just can't fit in I suppose, even though at least I've known some people who've become my good friends.

Hmm that's a very difficult question to answer. :P I'm a VERY observant person - I observe everything, partly because I do it to fill the emptiness in my own life, so I try to meddle into other people's lives. My ultimate dream is to become a writer (part-time journalist and photographer I suppose) and a psychologist. I feel that who I am now is seriously because of my upbringing and my education. I got a scholarship to this country that focuses A LOT on academic excellence. Here, my full potential was exposed, and I'm one of the very few scholars who actually dare to be in the humanities stream. Most people prefer to take pragmatic sciences, but I know that I like humanities and I'm pretty decent at writing essays. It's not easy especially with English not being my mother tongue, but I manage to pull it through as a foreigner here despite all the problems that go by.

My upbringing makes me very rebellious towards my parents and how I am perceived by society makes me very critical of it, but I'm ultimately just lost. =) That's the reason why I don't deem academic excellence the most important thing in my life. Sure, good grades enable me to go to the US and be a shrink, but there's that sort of void that cannot be fulfilled. There are some people here who only care about their studies and I just don't understand why sometimes. Where I come from is full of lazy people (I am included as well at times :P) so I'm used to that laid back culture. I guess I have a double personality - a fun one that focuses on enjoying life (I'm very open when it comes to talking about sex and other things unlike some people here) and another one that's very serious and lonely.

I'm not too complicated, trust me. :D


You are sounding more and more like Holden .:biggrin5:

I suspect, what you are feeling is that terrible thing, responsibility, decending slowly on to your shoulders. It is a terrible thing and is what forces us adults to go along with, and participate in, the bull**** or phoniness you have correctly identified. These are are the themes of Catcher in the Rye. As teenagers we struggle to keep free of it, but it always gets us in the end.

[Mutatis-Mutandis]

irinmisfit92, please stick around on these forums. You have a good voice.

[irinmisfit92]

You are sounding more and more like Holden .:biggrin5:

I suspect, what you are feeling is that terrible thing, responsibility, decending slowly on to your shoulders. It is a terrible thing and is what forces us adults to go along with, and participate in, the bull**** or phoniness you have correctly identified. These are are the themes of Catcher in the Rye. As teenagers we struggle to keep free of it, but it always gets us in the end.

Haha when you said that I laughed because it's ironic. I suppose yeah I do sound like him :P even though I don't flunk everything except English since THAT is exactly what happened to my junior at school whom I think is very similar to Holden. XD Yeah I think a lot of people here don't do it because of responsibility it's more of like, Dude I wanna be the very best at school successful! I think that's just shallow to be honest. Their IQ may be high, but their EQ is extremely low and they refuse to integrate with people who're very different from them.