I don't get this, I read Catcher in the Rye when I was 16/17. I didn't connect with it at all, he was acting completely crazy and reasoned in really strange ways. Maybe it's a frame of mind that many teenagers have, I dunno, you people are crazy I guess.
fjafjan on
Yepp, THE Fjafjan (who's THE fjafjan?)
- "Proving once again the deadliest animal of all ... is the Zoo Keeper" - Philip J Fry
The scene where Holden drops the record he bought for his sister and it shatters on the ice and he cries is intense. I love this book. If you hated it, maybe you should read it again. I thought Jane Eyre was good when I was young until I reread it.
I don't get this, I read Catcher in the Rye when I was 16/17. I didn't connect with it at all, he was acting completely crazy and reasoned in really strange ways. Maybe it's a frame of mind that many teenagers have, I dunno, you people are crazy I guess.
This.
RIP Salinger, I can respect an author who wrote a book that has clearly had such a major impact, but I don't see what was so fantastic about CitR. If anything, Holden annoyed me (as did the fact that my Lit instructor and several of the girls in my class professed a deep crush on him as a character archetype). Just don't get it.
I don't get this, I read Catcher in the Rye when I was 16/17. I didn't connect with it at all, he was acting completely crazy and reasoned in really strange ways. Maybe it's a frame of mind that many teenagers have, I dunno, you people are crazy I guess.
If you've never wanted to jam a toothbrush down someone's throat, you haven't really lived.
The best part of Catcher in the Rye is when Holden wakes up to find the old man fondling him, and he promptly walks out the door in a spooked-as-hell manner.
I don't get this, I read Catcher in the Rye when I was 16/17. I didn't connect with it at all, he was acting completely crazy and reasoned in really strange ways. Maybe it's a frame of mind that many teenagers have, I dunno, you people are crazy I guess.
This.
RIP Salinger, I can respect an author who wrote a book that has clearly had such a major impact, but I don't see what was so fantastic about CitR. If anything, Holden annoyed me (as did the fact that my Lit instructor and several of the girls in my class professed a deep crush on him as a character archetype). Just don't get it.
It's sad when someone dies, especially someone who is talented and loved by many.
But I just hated Catcher when I read it in High School. I could never come close to identifying with the character even though all my friends did. I was definitely an emo brat, but I think I was an emo brat in such a different way that I didn't really "get" it.
I don't get this, I read Catcher in the Rye when I was 16/17. I didn't connect with it at all, he was acting completely crazy and reasoned in really strange ways. Maybe it's a frame of mind that many teenagers have, I dunno, you people are crazy I guess.
This.
RIP Salinger, I can respect an author who wrote a book that has clearly had such a major impact, but I don't see what was so fantastic about CitR. If anything, Holden annoyed me (as did the fact that my Lit instructor and several of the girls in my class professed a deep crush on him as a character archetype). Just don't get it.
I only enjoyed reading the book because half way through it, once all of the girls had fallen in love with Holden, my English teacher pitched us the idea that Holden is in fact gay. I remember thinking by the end that he probably wasn't but it fucked with everyone in the class and made dissecting the book much more interesting.
SpectrumArcher of InfernoChaldea Rec RoomRegistered Userregular
edited January 2010
I really hated Catcher in the Rye when I read it, but it was still a good book to have read. Maybe I'd like it better if I read it again now. *shrug*
Ironically I loved a manga that owes many influences to it, Onani Master Kurosawa. (And pretty much everyone I've had read it loved it once they got past the introduction chapters.)
I really hated Catcher in the Rye when I read it, but it was still a good book to have read. Maybe I'd like it better if I read it again now. *shrug*
Ironically I loved a manga that owes many influences to it, Onani Master Kurosawa. (And pretty much everyone I've had read it loved it once they got past the introduction chapters.)
I faintly remember reading Catcher in the Rye, but my impression of it is that he could see quite a few faults in the world, but he couldn't see the faults in himself as a sociopath. I hope I remembered that correctly. Still, despite serial killers owning copies of Catcher in the Rye, it was quite an influential well-written work, and J.D. Sallinger shall be missed.
I'm glad you brought up Onani Master Kurosawa. It definitely felt like the Japanese version of Catcher in the Rye, focusing on the coming-of-age of the main character and the many wrong choices he makes in regards to the situations in his life. Thanks for recommending it, it was an amazing read.
B:L on
click for Anime chat
0
Options
HachfaceNot the Minister Farrakhan you're thinking ofDammit, Shepard!Registered Userregular
edited January 2010
Guys you're not really supposed to like Holden Caulfield, or be persuaded by his point of view in any way.
He is mentally ill. CitR is a portrait of a very disturbed young man in a society that does not give his illness the attention that he needs until it's too late.
The Glass family is a group of fictional characters that have been featured in a number of J.D. Salinger's short stories and also in the novel Franny and Zooey, which began as the short stories "Franny" and "Zooey." All but one of the Glass family stories were first published in The New Yorker; several of them have been collected and published in the two compilations Nine Stories and Raise High the Roof Beam, Carpenters and Seymour: An Introduction, and in the novel Franny and Zooey.
my favorite would be a perfect day for Banana fish
The story details Seymour's day on the beach, as his wife, Muriel, spends her time in a hotel room talking to her mother on the phone about clothing and Seymour's behavior. She asks about the location of a book by a German poet which Seymour sent her, but which she had never read. Seymour is concerned about many obscure things, such as people staring at his feet, and wears a bathrobe on the beach to avoid people staring at a tattoo which he does not have. While in the water, Seymour tells a story of the bananafish to a young girl named Sybil. The fish, he says, are "very ordinary looking" when they swim into a hole, but once in the hole, eat so much they cannot escape and subsequently die of banana fever. He then returns to his room where Muriel is sleeping, retrieves a gun from his luggage, sits down next to her and shoots himself in the right temple.
Guys you're not really supposed to like Holden Caulfield, or be persuaded by his point of view in any way.
He is mentally ill. CitR is a portrait of a very disturbed young man in a society that does not give his illness the attention that he needs until it's too late.
What? No.
Drez on
Switch: SW-7690-2320-9238Steam/PSN/Xbox: Drezdar
0
Options
HachfaceNot the Minister Farrakhan you're thinking ofDammit, Shepard!Registered Userregular
Guys you're not really supposed to like Holden Caulfield, or be persuaded by his point of view in any way.
He is mentally ill. CitR is a portrait of a very disturbed young man in a society that does not give his illness the attention that he needs until it's too late.
What? No.
The book ends with Holden totally losing it and becoming institutionalized.
Guys you're not really supposed to like Holden Caulfield, or be persuaded by his point of view in any way.
He is mentally ill. CitR is a portrait of a very disturbed young man in a society that does not give his illness the attention that he needs until it's too late.
What? No.
The book ends with Holden totally losing it and becoming institutionalized.
OK, but how does that make him "unlikeable" as you suggest?
He was kind of an asshole at times but ultimately he just wanted to protect children from losing their innocence, which is kind of noble. At the end, he realizes it's a futile dream.
I'd have to read it again to get into specifics, but Holden was a very well-written character that just about anyone could relate to in some small or large part. Holden is cited as being one of the most relateable characters in recent literary history, so for you to say we're "not supposed to like him" seems a bit bizarre. Sure, if you identify with him 100%, you may have a problem, but Holden is pieces of everyone.
Drez on
Switch: SW-7690-2320-9238Steam/PSN/Xbox: Drezdar
0
Options
HachfaceNot the Minister Farrakhan you're thinking ofDammit, Shepard!Registered Userregular
edited January 2010
I didn't say he was supposed to be unlikeable either. Whether you like Holden or not is entirely incidental to the quality of the book.
You seem to have misinterpreted my defense of the novel as an attack on it.
I didn't say he was supposed to be unlikeable either. Whether you like Holden or not is entirely incidental to the quality of the book.
You seem to have misinterpreted my defense of the novel as an attack on it.
So what other options are there? You either like someone, dislike someone, or feel nothing (apathy) toward someone. So if we aren't supposed to "like" him, that leaves dislike and apathy, neither of which I feel the reader is supposed to feel toward Holden.
The beauty of Holden is that most people can find some minor reflection of their own personality or philosophy in his character.
I guess I don't understand what you are asserting.
edit: Wait, you're trying to defend the book from those saying they didn't like Holden by saying that they aren't supposed to. I see what you are doing now, but I still disagree with you. I think you ARE supposed to like Holden, you ARE supposed to identify with him in some small or large way, and that most people do is a testament to the book and to Salinger's writing prowess. So let's not sully the book by pretending Holden isn't supposed to be a symbol people can find something in common with, and in turn like or appreciate, because that's the entire point of the character. The book and Holden are often uncomfortable, but that's life. Life is often uncomfortable.
That said, it's impossible to create anything that every single person will relate to. So I won't begrudge those that didn't relate to him, but I won't agree that it's because Holden is not supposed to be liked, either.
Drez on
Switch: SW-7690-2320-9238Steam/PSN/Xbox: Drezdar
0
Options
HachfaceNot the Minister Farrakhan you're thinking ofDammit, Shepard!Registered Userregular
edited January 2010
You can like him, you can not like him, you can be ambivalent towards him. But it's beside the point. Saying Catcher in the Rye is a bad book because Holden annoyed you is dumb. That is all.
You can like him, you can not like him, you can be ambivalent towards him. But it's beside the point. Saying Catcher in the Rye is a bad book because Holden annoyed you is dumb. That is all.
I don't disagree with this point.
I only disagree with your assessment of how the reader is "supposed to" respond to Holden Caulfield. I feel you made an incorrect objective statement about the book, and that it's worth discussing further. So, as a total aside to your point, I have my own point I'm trying to get across. And since this is a totally different point, it's not "besides the point."
You don't have to engage me on it if you don't have any interest in discussing the character, but your dismissiveness is a little silly-gooseish.
Drez on
Switch: SW-7690-2320-9238Steam/PSN/Xbox: Drezdar
0
Options
HachfaceNot the Minister Farrakhan you're thinking ofDammit, Shepard!Registered Userregular
edited January 2010
What I meant to say was "you don't have to like Holden," which is a more accurate description of my position than "you're not supposed to like Holden." I don't see any other disagreement we have.
Catcher in the Rye was the worst book I was ever forced to read in highschool
Holden Cryfield, anybody?
Thank you.
Yeah. I imagine every time someone said
"HOLDEN IS JUST LIKE ME! YOU KNOW ME MR SALINGER!"
he receded further and further into himself until finally he cut off all ties with society.
I think Catcher in the Rye, while a bit annoying at times, was a really well written and insightful novel. It really transcends how any one person or thinks or relates to any single character.
Catcher in the Rye was the worst book I was ever forced to read in highschool
Holden Cryfield, anybody?
Thank you.
Yeah. I imagine every time someone said
"HOLDEN IS JUST LIKE ME! YOU KNOW ME MR SALINGER!"
he receded further and further into himself until finally he cut off all ties with society.
I think Catcher in the Rye, while a bit annoying at times, was a really well written and insightful novel. It really transcends how any one person or thinks or relates to any single character.
How does it transcend? If you're going to use a word with that much weight you're going to need to showcase some pretty evocative moments in the novel or provide some wonderful blurbs of text to make that case.
but look at me.
i have a Fitzgerald sig/av. Of course I hate Catcher in the Rye.
Guys you're not really supposed to like Holden Caulfield, or be persuaded by his point of view in any way.
He is mentally ill. CitR is a portrait of a very disturbed young man in a society that does not give his illness the attention that he needs until it's too late.
:?:
It's been a while since I read it, but I'm under the impression the books leaves off on a more positive note, with Caulfield realizing that, you know, the entire world isn't populated with kids and phonies. He didn't immediately dismiss his teacher for holding him while he slept, he tried to make things up with phoebe, and he mentions trying to do better at his new school.
I didn't think he was completely aces by any means, but I definitely think there's room for optimism.
Catcher in the Rye was the worst book I was ever forced to read in highschool
Holden Cryfield, anybody?
Thank you.
Yeah. I imagine every time someone said
"HOLDEN IS JUST LIKE ME! YOU KNOW ME MR SALINGER!"
he receded further and further into himself until finally he cut off all ties with society.
I think Catcher in the Rye, while a bit annoying at times, was a really well written and insightful novel. It really transcends how any one person or thinks or relates to any single character.
How does it transcend? If you're going to use a word with that much weight you're going to need to showcase some pretty evocative moments in the novel or provide some wonderful blurbs of text to make that case.
but look at me.
i have a Fitzgerald sig/av. Of course I hate Catcher in the Rye.
Well, I hated Great Gatsby, so it's even. :P
I saw Caufield as the sort of character that everyone can relate to in his hatred of phonies, even though they wouldn't take it as far as he did. To some extent, he's the equivalent of some chick on Facebook or Myspace or whatever saying "I'm spiritual but not religious. I'm random. I don't like fakers, and I don't like drama!" He's one aspect everyone can agree with, taken to an extreme. It's sort of like what others have said previously; everyone can relate to him to some extent, even if they don't entirely agree with him.
You can like him, you can not like him, you can be ambivalent towards him. But it's beside the point. Saying Catcher in the Rye is a bad book because Holden annoyed you is dumb. That is all.
I don't think so. The story is ultimately about this kid and how he thinks. If you find his thoughts and actions completely foreign and unrelatable to how you think and act, then the book holds no weight. If the point is that you're supposed to see yourself in Holden then, for me at least, the book completely failed its purpose.
Posts
- "Proving once again the deadliest animal of all ... is the Zoo Keeper" - Philip J Fry
This.
RIP Salinger, I can respect an author who wrote a book that has clearly had such a major impact, but I don't see what was so fantastic about CitR. If anything, Holden annoyed me (as did the fact that my Lit instructor and several of the girls in my class professed a deep crush on him as a character archetype). Just don't get it.
If you've never wanted to jam a toothbrush down someone's throat, you haven't really lived.
It's sad when someone dies, especially someone who is talented and loved by many.
But I just hated Catcher when I read it in High School. I could never come close to identifying with the character even though all my friends did. I was definitely an emo brat, but I think I was an emo brat in such a different way that I didn't really "get" it.
I only enjoyed reading the book because half way through it, once all of the girls had fallen in love with Holden, my English teacher pitched us the idea that Holden is in fact gay. I remember thinking by the end that he probably wasn't but it fucked with everyone in the class and made dissecting the book much more interesting.
Ironically I loved a manga that owes many influences to it, Onani Master Kurosawa. (And pretty much everyone I've had read it loved it once they got past the introduction chapters.)
I faintly remember reading Catcher in the Rye, but my impression of it is that he could see quite a few faults in the world, but he couldn't see the faults in himself as a sociopath. I hope I remembered that correctly. Still, despite serial killers owning copies of Catcher in the Rye, it was quite an influential well-written work, and J.D. Sallinger shall be missed.
I'm glad you brought up Onani Master Kurosawa. It definitely felt like the Japanese version of Catcher in the Rye, focusing on the coming-of-age of the main character and the many wrong choices he makes in regards to the situations in his life. Thanks for recommending it, it was an amazing read.
He is mentally ill. CitR is a portrait of a very disturbed young man in a society that does not give his illness the attention that he needs until it's too late.
my favorite would be a perfect day for Banana fish
What? No.
The book ends with Holden totally losing it and becoming institutionalized.
OK, but how does that make him "unlikeable" as you suggest?
He was kind of an asshole at times but ultimately he just wanted to protect children from losing their innocence, which is kind of noble. At the end, he realizes it's a futile dream.
I'd have to read it again to get into specifics, but Holden was a very well-written character that just about anyone could relate to in some small or large part. Holden is cited as being one of the most relateable characters in recent literary history, so for you to say we're "not supposed to like him" seems a bit bizarre. Sure, if you identify with him 100%, you may have a problem, but Holden is pieces of everyone.
You seem to have misinterpreted my defense of the novel as an attack on it.
So what other options are there? You either like someone, dislike someone, or feel nothing (apathy) toward someone. So if we aren't supposed to "like" him, that leaves dislike and apathy, neither of which I feel the reader is supposed to feel toward Holden.
The beauty of Holden is that most people can find some minor reflection of their own personality or philosophy in his character.
I guess I don't understand what you are asserting.
edit: Wait, you're trying to defend the book from those saying they didn't like Holden by saying that they aren't supposed to. I see what you are doing now, but I still disagree with you. I think you ARE supposed to like Holden, you ARE supposed to identify with him in some small or large way, and that most people do is a testament to the book and to Salinger's writing prowess. So let's not sully the book by pretending Holden isn't supposed to be a symbol people can find something in common with, and in turn like or appreciate, because that's the entire point of the character. The book and Holden are often uncomfortable, but that's life. Life is often uncomfortable.
That said, it's impossible to create anything that every single person will relate to. So I won't begrudge those that didn't relate to him, but I won't agree that it's because Holden is not supposed to be liked, either.
I don't disagree with this point.
I only disagree with your assessment of how the reader is "supposed to" respond to Holden Caulfield. I feel you made an incorrect objective statement about the book, and that it's worth discussing further. So, as a total aside to your point, I have my own point I'm trying to get across. And since this is a totally different point, it's not "besides the point."
You don't have to engage me on it if you don't have any interest in discussing the character, but your dismissiveness is a little silly-gooseish.
Yeah. I imagine every time someone said
"HOLDEN IS JUST LIKE ME! YOU KNOW ME MR SALINGER!"
he receded further and further into himself until finally he cut off all ties with society.
I think Catcher in the Rye, while a bit annoying at times, was a really well written and insightful novel. It really transcends how any one person or thinks or relates to any single character.
How does it transcend? If you're going to use a word with that much weight you're going to need to showcase some pretty evocative moments in the novel or provide some wonderful blurbs of text to make that case.
but look at me.
i have a Fitzgerald sig/av. Of course I hate Catcher in the Rye.
:?:
It's been a while since I read it, but I'm under the impression the books leaves off on a more positive note, with Caulfield realizing that, you know, the entire world isn't populated with kids and phonies. He didn't immediately dismiss his teacher for holding him while he slept, he tried to make things up with phoebe, and he mentions trying to do better at his new school.
I didn't think he was completely aces by any means, but I definitely think there's room for optimism.
On the black screen
Well, I hated Great Gatsby, so it's even. :P
I saw Caufield as the sort of character that everyone can relate to in his hatred of phonies, even though they wouldn't take it as far as he did. To some extent, he's the equivalent of some chick on Facebook or Myspace or whatever saying "I'm spiritual but not religious. I'm random. I don't like fakers, and I don't like drama!" He's one aspect everyone can agree with, taken to an extreme. It's sort of like what others have said previously; everyone can relate to him to some extent, even if they don't entirely agree with him.
I don't think so. The story is ultimately about this kid and how he thinks. If you find his thoughts and actions completely foreign and unrelatable to how you think and act, then the book holds no weight. If the point is that you're supposed to see yourself in Holden then, for me at least, the book completely failed its purpose.