Catcher in the Rye is a real good book
Zach Action has written a follow up to my very own bagelicious book review: J.D. Salinger is Naked. I love this man.
Zach’s Zany Reading Recommendations: Catcher in the Rye
This is a good book that was written way back in 1951 which is probably why you haven’t heard of it. It is about a kid named Holden and he’s running around New York City, which is probably where they got the idea for Home Alone 2. This book has a LOT of cussing in it which is one of the reasons I recommend it. The other reason I recommend it is that it’s good.
If you like coming-of-age stories like Harry Potter: The Ocarina of Time and Facts of Life: Blair’s Revenge, you should definitely check this out. If you don’t have time to read, go see the movie version starring Shia Labeouf that comes out this Xmas.
If anyone out there really reads this, let me know and maybe we can start a book club or something. There’s a lot of discussing that can be done on this book, even more than I just did now.
ZachAction.com Zack Action!!! myspace.com/zachaction
___________________________
Think you’re funny? Submit your work!
Shia Labeouf + heavy profanity=me in love!
Fuck books…JK/BFF’s
(im in a cheeky mood today-i just created a “secret” page…oooo)
Stona Lisa
7 Sep 07 at 10:05 am
a secret page?!?!
bagel of everything
7 Sep 07 at 10:10 am
yes-dirty me…if you really would like to see
http://www.myspace.com/no_youdontknowme
SHHHHH-secret!
Stona Lisa
7 Sep 07 at 10:12 am
wtf? That’s awesomely weird
bagel of everything
7 Sep 07 at 10:13 am
WTF what….spit it out already
Stona Lisa
7 Sep 07 at 10:16 am
Fuck this book. I will never understand what makes this story special at all. I always enjoyed the profanity, but Holden was completely average in every way. Thanks for nothing, Salinger.
keywork
7 Sep 07 at 10:36 am
Kids these days. ;)
Can’t appreciate a decent bit of writing that was in fact rather daring and challenging at the time it was written.
Definitely stick to Seinfeld, The Fight Club and other similar things you can more easily relate to.
“These failed authors of the future don’t carry the book so they can re-read it, because they’ve read it 10 times and discover new insights with every dog ear. They’ve been trying since high-school to get through the drivel, because someone who also didn’t read it told them it would change their lives.”
Well, I’ve read it about 3-4 times now and I’ve thoroughly enjoyed it each time.
In Neil Gaiman’s American Gods he emulates the ‘voice’ of Holden to quite good effect.
I wonder why you have such a need to pan this book, other than because so many others think it’s wonderful without being able to explain, to your satisfaction, why they think so.
azahar
7 Sep 07 at 10:46 am
Any explanation would be welcome. Kids, indeed. I enjoy the color red. It’s wonderful. That’s profound.
keywork
7 Sep 07 at 11:10 am
Did you really dislike the book that much? Can you explain exactly why? Without resorting to sarcasm and sweeping generalisations?
You almost have to have more of a good reason to hate something than to simply enjoy something, don’t you think?
And I think you hit the nail on the head by making this sarcastic comment…
“I enjoy the color red. It’s wonderful. That’s profound.”
You see, it’s very difficult to explain the colour red, and what it means to you, to another person. Just like you sometimes can’t explain why a book has touched you, or meant something to you.
Especially when someone else is ridiculing the concept that anyone might like that book.
And yes, kids indeed. Honey, anyone under 40 is a ‘kid’ to me… nuthin personal, it’s just that I’m old. ;)
azahar
7 Sep 07 at 11:36 am
Ohh! Controversy!
Catcher in the Rye irks me. Not because some people love it, but because it seems most people find it incredibly boring and unreadable. Yet it’s required reading. I couldn’t read it. I tried, really I did. I’m an intelligent, if not well-read, person.
Don’t believe the hyperbole!
You ‘kids’ should read the original post, here.
I also have hate for Salinger. But I love love love Zach.
His writing takes a bit of getting used to for some people, especially those used to the hard edged cynicism here at RR. Zach is as cynical as the rest of us, but he puts lots of sugar on top.
bagel of everything
7 Sep 07 at 11:46 am
Here: I disliked the book because, as far as young males go, there was nothing particularly startling or unique about Holden Caulfield and his take on humanity or the world for that matter. At the time, it must have been a breath of fresh air. Now, not so much. So, I really have a hard time legitimizing a slot for this book in any school’s current curriculum. If you can’t explain why something holds value then there is no way to create a need for it.
But to simply state that a book is great because, well- it’s great, is pretty lazy. I can’t explain it. Yes you can. Set down the kool-aid, most of us speak english. No offense taken, AZ.
keywork
7 Sep 07 at 12:03 pm
Controversy? Well, possibly in a minor key…
“Catcher in the Rye irks me. Not because some people love it, but because it seems most people find it incredibly boring and unreadable.”
Again with the sweeping generalisations. Well okay then, most people I know happen to like it very much and found it very readable and enjoyable. So?
“You ‘kids’ should read the original post”
Which I clearly did as I quoted from it in comment 7.
What I’m getting here is that you guys don’t like the book because it’s now required reading at schools wherever you happen to live.
I once felt the same way about Hamlet when I was a teenager. Luckily I tried it again later on when I was better able to appreciate it. I suggest you do the same with Catcher in the Rye, but you may want to wait a few more years before you try it again.
Anyhow, hard-edged cynicism is not my style so I think I’ll leave you to your opinions.
I quite enjoy a good debate but I think on this subject it’s a case of having to agree to disagree.
And no hard feelings in the slightest - it’s been fun.
azahar
7 Sep 07 at 12:45 pm
“Again with the sweeping generalisations”
Perhaps I should have said “most people I have discussed it with”. However, it’s a fairly wide demographic.
“Which I clearly did as I quoted from it in comment 7.”
That was more for the people following this thread of comments. So they’d know what we were discussing.
“What I’m getting here is that you guys don’t like the book because it’s now required reading (…)”
It wasn’t required reading for me, only suggested. I read what I could of it as an adult. I’ve always had difficulty with it. The writing is horrid! It is supposed to read the way HC thinks, right? Who thinks like that?
“And no hard feelings in the slightest - it’s been fun.”
Indeed. I hope you’ll come back. I’m well aware that we do not speak for the world here at RR. We
very much appreciate hearing the views of others.
bagel of everything
7 Sep 07 at 12:52 pm
fun it was. this book was required reading when I was in school (i’ll be 28 next week) so this has been going on for at least 15 years by my count.
keywork
7 Sep 07 at 12:54 pm
I’m 30, but my school was more focused on learning to sign our names without a giant X.
It likely was required in college, but I dodged that bullet by studying the sciences!
I only had one required english course. We had to read just one novel for it, and we got to choose from a long list. I chose 1984.
I wish I’d waited until I was older to read it, tho. I didn’t appreciate it as I likely would now.
bagel of everything
7 Sep 07 at 1:08 pm
I caught 1984 at the right time: after that craptastic Salinger book. Before I was let loose on a public high school in Texas, I had already made my way through various private learning institutions: Catholic, Episcopal, and Evangelical. This is why I’m hot. And mentally unstable.
keywork
7 Sep 07 at 1:17 pm
[...] today I was having a bit of a debate about the merits of The Catcher in The Rye over at Ration Reality and it got me thinking about how we personally judge the books we read. And also how we justify our [...]
good book/bad book « casa az
7 Sep 07 at 1:42 pm
Thanks guys, I will be back. And as you see, you also gave me some food for thought to start a new post on my blog. Feel free to join in!
azahar
7 Sep 07 at 1:45 pm
already there.
keywork
7 Sep 07 at 1:47 pm
Me too. KW, you musta left your comment while I was writing mine.
bagel of everything
7 Sep 07 at 1:50 pm
yeah. kinda freaky.
keywork
7 Sep 07 at 1:57 pm
Okay, so 30 and 28 …
I’m (eek!) 50, by the way. Just to say that I’ve had a few more years to read stuff - *not* insuating I’ve read better stuff, but probably more stuff as I usually get through a couple of books a week. You can do the arithmetic.
And I once felt so proud that I convinced my 12th grade English teacher to let me skip Hamlet. What an idiot.
Years later I saw it performed in Bristol England and my boyfriend couldn’t believe I’d never read it! So the week before the performance we read the play together with both of us taking various parts (HE got to be Hamlet!) and it was not only fun but it made seeing the play, well, mean something. Especially as I’d been Gertrude and Ophelia (damn boyfriend also got to be the ghost).
Anyhow, you may not like Holden - I don’t think he was meant to be particularly likable - but if you think back to New York 1951 and let go of the idea that this is somehow supposed to be meaningful for YOU because you were made to read it at school … you might find yourself enjoying it in spite of your previous prejudices. Stranger things have happened.
So … maybe see you over at my place?
azahar
7 Sep 07 at 2:01 pm
Right … I see you got there while I was writing that last longish post. Great!
azahar
7 Sep 07 at 2:03 pm
I like the book. I think it’s like those paintings you see where you think “I could have done that,” but you DIDN’T. It’s a good book. It’s funny, it’s sharp, it’s solid. I didn’t know Bagel had written a piece about it when I wrote this. In looking at hers and then the posts about it, I can’t believe someone said something about taking Gatsby down, too. That’s just wrong. Gatsby is so good it HURTS. Just because masses of people like something doesn’t necessarily mean it’s lame.
zach action
7 Sep 07 at 8:47 pm
“I think it’s like those paintings you see where you think “I could have done that,” but you DIDN’T.”
That’s succinct and genius, Zach. You have a way about you that you can say something so simply, when other people use pages of 8 syllable words and don’t come close to making the same point.
That’s prolly why I enjoy your work so much.
bagel of everything
7 Sep 07 at 10:14 pm
And apologies to Zach for somewhat hijacking this post - my comment 7 was actually in reply to Bagel’s link ‘JD Salinger is Naked’ and so I should have posted it there (oops).
Anyhow, all this got me rereading Catcher in the Rye. I’m on page 60 and haven’t laughed out loud so much since the last Pratchett book I read.
Oh, and Loricat
has a rather good book blog if you’re interested.
azahar
8 Sep 07 at 7:39 am
Prachet = genius.
Salinger = hack.
The two are not even remotely comparable.
jessecuster
8 Sep 07 at 11:36 am
Was I comparing them?
Most enlightening - thanks dude! :)
azahar
9 Sep 07 at 4:27 pm
“Anyhow, all this got me rereading Catcher in the Rye. I’m on page 60 and haven’t laughed out loud so much since the last Pratchett book I read.”
Uh … looks like a comparison to me … it made you laugh in the same manner as does Mr. Pratchett.
jessecuster
9 Sep 07 at 7:13 pm
Well, it was a comparison, but about how frequently I laughed out loud, not why I laughed, though I understand how someone might have thought I was comparing the two writers. Which, by the way, I don’t think are similar. But they can both be very funny in their own ways.
So … why do you think Pratchett is a genius and Salinger is a hack? I’m curious about what criteria people use to judge writers and their books.
azahar
10 Sep 07 at 3:45 am
[...] exclusives from Zach: What did you pay for “In Rainbows”? - Catcher in the Rye is a real good book Gary Coleman: Model Railroader, Model American - The Wooden Rose - TLDR Biographies: [...]
Looking back with a discerning eye « Ration Reality
3 Dec 07 at 11:05 pm
[...] Zachlusives: Catcher in the Rye is a real good book - Looking back with a discerning eye What did you pay for “In Rainbows”? - Gary Coleman: [...]
What Charles Dickens’ Day means to me. « Ration Reality
7 Feb 08 at 7:49 am
CNRIc7 hi! hice site!
nick
29 Jul 08 at 3:27 pm