Printable View
I'd have to say The Catcher in the Rye by J.D. Salinger was my overall favorite. But I also loved Lord of the Flies by William Golding, Nectar in a Sieve by Kamala Markandaya, and Picture Bride by Yoshiko Uchida. They were all terrific reads even if I drug my feet on finishing some of them. ;)
It amazes me that a high school freshman can still find "Catcher" a meaningful novel today. It completely blew me away when I read it in 1961 at the age of 17. Six years later the film "The Graduate" did the same thing to me. In my mind there is a weird connection between the book and the film, as if Benjamin was Holden after college. Both found modern life "phony" or "plastic."Quote:
Originally Posted by Squeaky
I'm a bit surprised you liked "Lord" as well as "Catcher." The two authors have opposite views of young people. To Salinger they are innocent and unspoiled. To Golding they are little beasts kept in check by adult supervision. I agree with Salinger: kids start out perfect until society gets its hands on them.
Books I've read this year that I would rate 9+ out of 10:
Mark Haddon
The Curious Incident of the Dog in the Night-Time (9/10)
James A. Michener
Chesapeake (10/10)
Edward P. Jones
The Known World (9/10)
Philip Roth
American Pastoral (9/10)
John Updike
Rabbit Redux (9/10)
Rabbit is Rich (9/10)
Rabbit at Rest (9.5/10)
Rabbit Remembered (9.5/10)
Carlos Ruiz Zafon
The Shadow of the Wind (9.5/10)
It wasn't really about the opposite views although that is definately true. I simply loved how they both expressed their views. Salinger was very subtle in many points in the book about how he expressed what was happening to Holden by telling the story from Holden's point of view, whereas Golding seemed to favor expressing the emotions of his characters in their actions which sometimes seemed like a very dramatic approach. Yes, they had opposite views, but I was more enthralled by their unique styles. They were both interesting to say the least.Quote:
Originally Posted by starrwriter
As for who I agree with, I would have to say that niether of them are very far off. Children start out innocent and free of corruption until society gets a hold of them, then they become the little beasts that Golding wrote about. Simply not as desperate and abandoned. It's also worth keeping in mind the differences between the settings of the two books. The Lord of the Flies was about children doing their best just to survive. On some level so was the Catcher in the Rye however the circumstances were less extreme in comparison to Lord and as such the behavior of the characters would mirror that difference. Just my opinion, it's something to think about though. Golding might not have been speaking out against the children, but perhaps their condition and the society so that left them unprepared to take care of themselves. Ah, I could debate and discuss those two until the end of time. :)
I have tried to keep a link between the books I read in 2005. They are ;-
HOUSE ON THE STRAND by Daphne Du Maurier - Time travel with a difference
NEVER LET ME GO by Kazou Ishiguro - Human cloning & the subjects realisation
BRAVE NEW WORLD by Aldous Huxley - Prophetic & disturbing
In my estimation they all deal with 'CONTROL' and the consequences
on the individual...
Twins - Caroline Cooney
Middle Sex
These are added to my list.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Aurora Ariel
Angela's Ashes (Frank McCourt)
In Cold Blood (Truman Capote)
Nine Stories (J.D. Salinger)