RIP J.D Salinger.

By joining our community you will have the ability to post topics and access other forums reserved for members. Registration is quick, simple and absolutely free. Join our community today by clicking here.

Posted: Fri Jan 29, 2010 10:23 am

Or is it?

"Catcher in the Rye" is one of the most boring, over-rated books that I've ever read.
A tedious, meandering story of a spoilt, whining rich kid became iconic as the epitomy of teenage angst.
The only thing that makes it mildly subversive is that a few whackos are said to have read it before going postal.
I admit that it's a book that I keep picking up just to see if I can find what makes it such a "controversial classic" - last time was a couple of days ago but I still couldn't see anything that makes it stand out from any other run-of-the-mill novel.
Is it just me or do you have to be a male American teenager to get it?

As for Salinger himself? A total recluse. What's there to say good-bye to?

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/8486169.stm

Posted: Fri Jan 29, 2010 11:43 am

I'd certainly like to give Catcher in the Rye a go one day, if only to figure out how the *&^% it could have inspired Mark Chapman to shoot John Lennon.

"At that point my big part won and I wanted to go back to my hotel, but I couldn't. I waited until he came back. He knew where the ducks went in winter, and I needed to know this" (a reference to The Catcher in the Rye).

Baiting Guru Joined: 31 Jan 2007 Posts: 12237

There was a nice obituary HERE

Posted: Fri Jan 29, 2010 4:05 pm

^^ Classic.

Sort of sums up the guy and the book in a paragraph to me.

Not quite a Newb Joined: 22 Jan 2010 Posts: 45

Maybe they can cinematize it now. It'll enter public domain in 15 years or so anyway.

Baiting Guru Joined: 03 May 2007 Posts: 18313

I liked Catcher in the Rye and am surprised that you considered it boring. Maybe it's because I read for it for a college course on the sociology of youth (mostly about teens) and the context made it more enjoyable.

Not quite a Newb Joined: 22 Jan 2010 Posts: 45

Caulfield is the least likeable character ever conceived.

Posted: Fri Jan 29, 2010 6:36 pm

Quote:

Is it just me or do you have to be a male American teenager to get it?

I was a male American teenager when I read it,and I didn't get it.The character always stuck me as a pretentious little whiner.

Posted: Fri Jan 29, 2010 7:06 pm

Xabungle wrote:

Caulfield is the least likeable character ever conceived.

Then you must not have read very widely....

Sorry to take a cheap shot, Xabungle, but seriously there are plenty more dislikeable characters in literature than Holden Claufield.

Like Ima, I also enjoyed Cather in the Rye..... maybe because I read it as a sophomore in high school (like 12 years ago... yeah, if only). Actually though I think I may have liked his other work better. There is a good collection of 9 short stories (Teddy was my favorite) and then Franny and Zooey. I always thought he captured the late steamship, heavy smoking era very well. And about him being a recluse, so what? Being an extrovert isn't the definition of having a meaningful life. Not to me anyway.

RIP, JD.

Posted: Fri Jan 29, 2010 7:11 pm

I read Catcher several times as a male teenager and related to it. But like a security blanket, it served its purpose and I discarded it and forgot about it.

For those who need a reason to go on living: there are rumors that Salinger left behind a corpus of unpublished work that may go to print.

Posted: Fri Jan 29, 2010 7:14 pm

I had to read it in school (during a course "Youth in Literature", together with The Graduate) and I liked it most of all English books that I had to read in school (which were mainly text collections about the American Dream, or the Canterville Ghost). I even read it again on my own will.
Didn´t know that the author was still alive. RIP.

Posted: Fri Jan 29, 2010 8:25 pm

Mr. Green wrote:

Then you must not have read very widely....

No. He's got a point. What's there to like about him? Caulfield is nothing but a sociopath. Even when he was meant to be self-deprecating he still comes across as an arrogant little wanker.

OK. Perhaps the statement that Xabungle makes is a bit of an exageration but I don't think he had any redeeming features.

My belief is that CITR only got the acclaim because literary critics who put it up there were Holden Caudfields themselves in their younger days - all whiny little, rich kids attending private schools and with a penchant for looking down their noses at other people.
The vast majority of the rest of the population don't and can't relate to Holden but went along nodding their heads saying what a good book it is like a bunch of nodding dogs.

Sometimes I believe we like shit simply because we're told that it isn't shit by someone who says that they know better.

Posted: Fri Jan 29, 2010 9:11 pm

I read it in University. I found it a rather depressive read, put me in a bad mood for a few days.
I am doubtful if I read it again it would leave the same impression on me.

I have read his other short story, he was a very good writer. Americans idolised him.

Wannabe Baiter Joined: 22 Jan 2010 Posts: 85

I am American i do not Idolize him. Now Patton I could follow Patton
Tim

Posted: Sat Jan 30, 2010 12:36 am

Heard all the hype, did not bother to read Catcher.
Had my share of good and bad american writers (mostly Sci-Fi and Pulp Fiction, and also some of the classics).
Thiss Sallinger guy and his RYE thingie simply did not CATCH my interest.