Is Catcher in the Rye any Good?

showsaf

I'm sixteen btw.I was just wondering was it worth reading or if its outdated or something.i saw it on south park and they Did'int like it.So is it overrated.thanks

coffee_cake

I haven't read it in about 15 years or so but I remember thinking at the time it was good.
Give it a go?

RGDATA!

showsaf wrote: »

I'm sixteen btw.I was just wondering was it worth reading or if its outdated or something.i saw it on south park and they Did'int like it.So is it overrated.thanks

if you're 16 give it a shot. i loved it at that age and went on to read and re-read all salinger's work. i guess some people grow out of it, which is why it's often said to be one to read when you're 16.
it's such a short read that it's worth spending a few nights on just to see what the fuss is about and make up your own mind.
south park is great and they love shooting down sacred cows like catcher in the rye, but i say it's definitely worth a shot, as are the short stories. enjoy.

Asphyxia

Totally I thought it was good, definitely worth a read.

jam_mac_jam

Its quite short so give it a go. I never saw the attraction myself. Very over rated and boring

padraig_f

I loved it, read it about that age. It's not outdated at all, reads like a contemporary novel.

Eliot Rosewater

JD Salinger once remarked that The Catcher in the Rye was written for adults, and I agree with him. Not to dismiss the 16 year olds who read the book, but I do think that that book's generally misunderstood and held up as something it's.

The main character, Holden Caulfield, is almost certainty meant to be ironic; i.e., he's just as phony as the people he derides. There are lots of examples of this in the book. But he is considered, by the average teen who gets reads it and likes it, to be a hero and a role model. And the influence of the book on people has effects that I think the author would not like. There is this fundamental misunderstanding of what the book is really saying, and what it's really promoting.

To answer the OP's question, JD Salinger is an excellent writer. Given the concerns above I'd stay away from The Catcher in the Rye until you've a bit more of a handle on Salinger and, indeed, life itself. I recommend his brilliant collection of short stories For Esme With Love and Squalor instead.

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

the west wing

I love Salinger's writings but I would agree that maybe you should begin with For Esme With Love and Squalor. I would urge you to read Catcher at some stage though, don't let South Park make up your mind for you!

kylith

I thought it was overrated, but still a good read.

hatful

Holden Caulfield definitely has a unique voice, I haven't read anything like it since. His interactions with Ackley and Stradlater always stand out in my mind. Give it a whirl

wilmer mclean

Its ok, read it when I was around your age. Its defiantly worth a read considering its so talked about and is also quite short and easy to read.

Chances

I've read it twice now. The second read was to see if I was mistaken the first time and if it was actually over rated. Nope! It survived a second reading. I loved it. It's one of those, you do or you don't books.

Give it a go, you can get a copy for half nothing. Take what you want/can from it, don't worry if you don't get into it.
I read it first when I was 14 and thought it fairly alright, but it grows on you with age.

rubabbel

Ah, Catcher in the Rye is one of my favourite books, and by one of my favourite writers. Like a previous poster, I reread it again to see whether it stood up to a more 'mature' reading and it definitely did. You take different things from it depending on your age.

Sad Professor

I read it as a young teenager and loved it. I haven't read it since and don't have much desire to, either. As an adult, I just don't think I'd be able to stomach the main character. But I'll probably revisit it one day.

I would disagree somewhat with what Eliot said above. I never thought of the main character as a hero. Caulfield being as "phony" as the adults in the book is very true, but I always interpreted this as showing how he himself was becoming an adult. A fact which he wrestles with. It is a coming of age story.

That's not to say that an adult can't take something away from the book as well. But I think the main character's voice will come across as unforgivably grating unless you once read it and related to what he was saying.

KnifeWRENCH

I thought it was ok but not worthy of all the hype it gets. Then again, I was an angsty adult (as opposed to an angsty teen!) when I first read it last year at age 20, so I may have enjoyed it more if I read it when I was 16 or something.

I'll probably read it again some time in a few years but I won't be expecting a lot of new insight or anything from rereading it.

raah!

I don't think it's fair to call this a book about teenagers at all. I think the views expressed by holden in this are very much Salinger's own adult views. Salinger was a hermit later in life after all.

That he has chosen to express them here through a teenager I think is related to the fact that he so obviously admires the honesty and frankness of children. As a teenager holden is at this threshold between being a 'phony' and the honesty of childhood. He is coming to recognise the fakery in himself, as well as in his peers and adults. A telling quote in the book is where he is talking about being a doctor or a lawyer or something and says "how would you know that you are doing the things because they are good and not becase you are trying to be a hot shot" or somethign to that effect.

The theme of people being fake is in no way restricted to "coming of age" novels (and I don't think it's fair to categorise Catcher soley as such a novel). We see an almost identical frame of someone who doesn't want to take part in the fakery of society in Camus' 'The Stranger' as well as 'The Fall'. Throughout Tolstoy's work we see vanity put forward as an explaining motive for people's actions.

Sl!mCharles

Decent.

Good for one of those rebellious, "I don't give a f*ck" phases. For me anyway.

wurzlitzer

It is really good...some people actually become hooked on re-reading it
I have only read it twice
a friend of mine has read it at least seven times..
maybe she is in training to be a serial killer..:eek:

Fr Tod Umptious

Hi Op,
Give it a go, as people are saying it's a short read so why not.
I read it first when I was 16 and re-read it about a year or two later.

I was amazed at how my own opinion of the main character had changed in that short period of time.

ArtSmart

showsaf wrote: »

I'm sixteen btw.I was just wondering was it worth reading or if its outdated or something.i saw it on south park and they Did'int like it.So is it overrated.thanks

easy with the south park dishing. they were making the point that Eliot Rosewater mentions - some misunderstand it.

still, i say read it for sure - in one sitting. try drinking cans of coke while doing so.

twenty years later, read it again. but then drink either tea or brandy. but don't drink wine whatever you do, especially if you're heading to a dinner party later that night. trust me on this.

Acacia

I read it when I was 15/16, because I had heard so many good things about it, and believed the hype. I thought it was absolute crap. I can't remember it very well because I only read it once ( a bad sign in itself) and it was a few years ago now ( getting old *sigh* ). What stands out most for me was how terribly boring it was. It was just a chore to read.

Having said that, it's probably one of those books you "have to" read so you should probably check it out to make your own judgement on it. I wouldn't bothher spending money on it though, I'd get it from a library or something.

ArtSmart

Res Ipsa Loquitur

holystungun9

kylith wrote: »

I thought it was overrated, but still a good read.

Yep, cannot believe that it has such a cult status thing, nice book, nothing more. Not sure what I missed in it.

Anywhoodle

Yeah, I read Catcher in my teens and was being pretty underwhelmed by it at the time. Have since returned to it (22 now) and it's defo gone up in my estimation a little. Much prefer other Salinger works like For Esme... and Franny and Zooey though (<-- absolutely adore it!) But sure, like ye all said, it's a pretty short read. Worth a go OP.

parker kent

Eliot Rosewater wrote: »

JD Salinger once remarked that The Catcher in the Rye was written for adults, and I agree with him. Not to dismiss the 16 year olds who read the book, but I do think that that book's generally misunderstood and held up as something it's.

The main character, Holden Caulfield, is almost certainty meant to be ironic; i.e., he's just as phony as the people he derides. There are lots of examples of this in the book. But he is considered, by the average teen who gets reads it and likes it, to be a hero and a role model. And the influence of the book on people has effects that I think the author would not like. There is this fundamental misunderstanding of what the book is really saying, and what it's really promoting.

To answer the OP's question, JD Salinger is an excellent writer. Given the concerns above I'd stay away from The Catcher in the Rye until you've a bit more of a handle on Salinger and, indeed, life itself. I recommend his brilliant collection of short stories For Esme With Love and Squalor instead.

This was the basically the post I was about to make. I read it as a 15-year-old and liked it, but nothing more. I re-read it last summer and it had a much larger impact on me. I feel you need to be an adult to truly understand that Holden is as idiotic as the people he derides.

Salinger is a terrific writer, so I'd recommend starting elsewhere and building up to Catcher.

Edit: Both times that I read it, I found I read it quickly and it was anything but a chore.

Eliot Rosewater

I finished reading The Catcher in the Rye this morning. My opinions on the book have changed significantly since last week!

I think the main misunderstanding with the book is this: the book is primarily about Holden Caufield, not about the society around him. When adolescents get inspired by it, I think they miss the point. It's not about the phoneys. It's not a call to rebellion. It's a character analysis of a 16-year old insincere young man who can't deal with moving away from the security of his childhood, and with the death of his brother.

I don't think it's a clear cut as that, in that Salinger sometimes speaks through Holden, making commentaries about people and society that aren't merely manifestations of Holden's massive insecurities, but are things that Salinger genuinely believes himself. For example,

And besides, even if you did go around saving guys' lives and all, how would you know if you did it because you really wanted to save guys' lives, or because you did it because what you really wanted to do was be a terrific lawyer, with everybody slapping you on the back and congratulating you in court when the goddam trial was over, the reporters and everybody, the way it is in the dirty movies?

So it's certainly grey.

I thought this was the best part in the book:

I have a feeling that you're riding for some kind of a terrible, terrible fall. But I don't honestly know what kind.... It may be the kind where, at the age of thirty, you sit in some bar hating everybody who comes in looking as if he might have played football in college. Then again, you may pick up just enough education to hate people who say, 'It's a secret between he and I.' Or you may end up in some business office, throwing paper clips at the nearest stenographer. I just don't know.

And I think the point about Holden not being a role model is cemented on the next page when Mr. Antollini says "I don't want to scare you, but I can very clearly see you dying nobly, one way or another, for some highly unworthy cause." And then he quotes Stekel - "The mark of the immature man is that he wants to die nobly for a cause, while the mark of the mature man is that he wants to live humbly for one."

Mr. Antollini isn't a clear-cut character by any means - what with the shenanigans later that night - and the way he communicates here seems a little "phoney", but I do think Salinger is speaking through him, in the same way he sometimes speaks through the flawed Holden.

Travel is good

Eliot Rosewater wrote: »

I recommend his brilliant collection of short stories For Esme With Love and Squalor instead.

Thanks so much for the recommendation, I'm really enjoying this book.

I still can't figure out how to multi-quote, so thank you too west wing for the recommended book.

Galwaymother

My daughter ( early teenager) has read it this year, and loved it! Especially his use of language. She was going around talking like him...Go for it, then you can re-read later to understand the different layers of meaning if need be!

kingtubby

I don't believe the writers of South Park were trying to say it was bad. I think they were just pointing out that all the notoriety the book gets for being explicit with bad language etc is undue. The kids were expecting a filth novel and what they got was much different and thats why they thought it sucked.