The Catcher in the Rye by JD Salinger

[kelby_lake]

i liked it, not as much as i hoped to, but i still did. holden could be annoying at times, but come on he's a teenager!

[Mockingbird_z]

I loved this book!
I think its the kind of book which gives you more to think of as you grow older.
i read it only a few weeks ago and though i am not a teenager i could understand his feelings.
and I liked his idea of working as "catcher in the rye".
its a great book!

[Morten]

His stories are better, much better. But a good novel.

[Inderjit Sanghe]

The great masterpiece of 20th century American literature. Salinger's prose is dry and funny, his observations are brilliant and immature, Caulfield is in many ways the 20th century incarnation of Arthur Rimbaud-the precocious teenager who doesn't fit in, doesn't have a set path in life, and notices the fakeness of other people and institutions. Caulfield however, is a lot less neurotic than Rimbaud, and lacks his literary genius. As far as 'themes' go, Salinger is also perceptive as (say) Faulkner, though far less boring, and certainly as original.

[moose gurl]

I found it cold and unmoving, but I'm not a fan of Salinger's writing at all. Not even his short stories. I think it's just a personal preference.

I love this, Antiquarian, because I loved The Catcher in the Rye. I'll admit that I haven't read any other Saligner works, but I thought this one was phenomenal. I can understand you not liking it, though, because at first I felt the exact same way about it being "cold and unmoving." I HATED Holden when I was actually reading the book--I thought he was really annoying and I despised how he "broke the fourth wall" and addressed the reader directly. It wasn't until much later after I finished the book that I really came to love it. Even my favorite part--the part where Mr. Antolini reveals the point of the whole novel--I thought was incredibly outdone and he kind of hit you over the head with it. But after about a month (and it really took that long) I began to just love the message there, and I started rereading bits and pieces and I really really liked it. It took me a long time to warm up at first...it's pretty difficult to get to know Holden, and I think that's the point: since he's so alienated, he becomes alienating.
But I totally understand where you're coming from.

[xXxSair01xXx]

I wanted to like this book SO badly. It's obviously a legendary work of fiction, and the first page definitely had my attention. By the second page I was bored. The abusive repetition of particular words, especially 'goddamn' and 'phony', really started getting to me. Many authors are able to write an entire novel in which very little actually happens but they completely capture the feeling and you become a part of the novel. JD Salinger is not one of those authors. I didn't feel a thing, to be honest I just wanted to get to the end in the hopes that there was some sort of point buried somewhere in it.

In summary: Put the goddamn book back on the goddamn shelf, it's as phony as the goddamn phonies who say they've read it.

thats exactly how i felt, i also felt that way about jack kerouac's 'on the road' and i really wanted to like these books and be blown away by them like everyone else seems to be but i was underwhelmed.

[RG57]

I read it because i heard that itt was a book worth reading, a sort of 'read before you die' listed. I found it slow going and never could really get into it. I still have it on my shelf and maybe one day I will give it another read.

[Dr. Hill]

I did not dislike this book intensely, but I found it rather lacking and the fact that no minor characters, save Phoebe, made any effect on the novel disappointed me, regardless of whether it was intended by Salinger.

[John Gargo]

I know this novel is pretty much required reading these days for high school students, but for some reason I was never assigned it (I think it was because I placed in the honor's class or something... I know I remember seeing some of my friends with copies way back then).

Anyway, I finally got around to reading it and I loved it. Holden is a superbly realized character. As for the repetative language, well the book is written in the first person, and the narrator is emotionally troubled/immature, and thus I think Salinger was very effective in giving Holden a voice.

I am very interested in reading more of Salinger's works... I've just ordered Nine Stories, Franny and Zooey and Raise High the Roof Beam, Carpenters and Seymour: An Introduction, which I understand represents the rest of his output. It's a shame he hasn't written more.

By the way, why no J.D. Salinger author section?

[Quilp]

It was from 'and all that David Copperfield Kind of crap' where I became disinterested; and it was all downhill from there

David Copperfield is a true masterpiece unlike this horrid pretender.

[Mopey Droney]

While I won't say my reading of the book is the only valid one, I still feel the point of the novel is missed by those who love it as well as those who don't. People talk about Salinger writing "against" phonies, people talk about all the "chrissakes" and "goddams", and talk about Holden's very vitriolic, very adolescent temperament and whether or not they can relate to it. You see, I suspect many young readers simply relate (or don't relate) to Holden and his angst, and therefore assume that they share Salinger's temperament and attitude, without considering Holden as a literary creation separate from Salinger. Salinger didn't want us to simply relate to and idolize Holden as some do. He wanted us to see that he complains about the people who get in his reading light, but that he's also very inconsiderate about getting into other people's shaving light! He wanted us to see Holden not as ourselves but as a flawed human being, who loved his little brother dearly, and when that brother died, went out and cut his hand by punching all the windows in the garage. I'm getting carried away here. I just wish more people would talk about those sort of moments, the really meaningful moments in the novel, and not just the funny, surfacey stuff that will either endear you or alienate you.

[Caspa]

I read this book a few years ago, and to be honest I can hardly even remember the narrative. Though I really didn't find it that striking. As the original poster said, Holden's narrative voice does indeed come across as very 'phoney'.

I think I might like to re-read this book though, as it is one considered by many as a 'classic', I might just not have got it on my first read.

[Alexei]

I didn't really liked it, for me it was a rather average book. When I shared my opinion in another forum I was scolded and sent to reread it when I grow up This left me a bitter memory in addition to the disappointment from the unsatisfying reading.

A few months later I started reading a short story from Salinger and surprisingly the story turned out to be a wonderful read. I continued reading his short stories and I realised I actually like Salinger's works. So, if you want to read Salinger I will rather recommend his short stories, in my opinion they are much better.

[Caspa]

Thanks for that recommendation Alexei. I haven't heard anything about his short stories before, so I'll have to check them out.

I also heard that 'Franny & Zooey' is a decent read, however I've not read it myself.

[Alexei]

Thanks for that recommendation Alexei. I haven't heard anything about his short stories before, so I'll have to check them out.

I also heard that 'Franny & Zooey' is a decent read, however I've not read it myself.

You are welcome
I think so too. Well, actually I have read only the first part of it ("Franny"), but it was really good. I am not sure how to define what exactly makes it such a good reading. It's a bit odd for a short story, but it's short so you can give it a try anyway. I suppose the second one is also very good.