Killahit
08.03.11 | Though caulfield is pretty cool and shit |
AnotherBrick
08.03.11 | fuck that book |
Pharoh
08.03.11 | book that fuck |
Killahit
08.03.11 | that book fuck |
crazyblinddude
08.03.11 | It's like a coming of age sort of thing. When you're at the point in life where you're lost and can't find where you belong or something idk. I liked it. |
tiesthatbind
08.03.11 | I thought it was pretty good. |
Loanshark
08.03.11 | I haven't read it yet. Need to. |
liledman
08.03.11 | its sitting next to my bed right now, next in line to read. |
toxin.
08.03.11 | I couldn't really find much meaning in it, honestly. It was an okay read, but I didn't find it altogether that deep. |
Aids
08.03.11 | one of my all-time favourite books
/cliche |
YetAnotherBrick
08.03.11 | It's interesting, a tad overrated, though. I think the reason it's still really highly regarded today is because it caused such a commotion when it first came out. It's a great escape for angsty teens, but the writing isn't really all that special. |
Aids
08.03.11 | "I think the reason it's still really highly regarded today is because it caused such a commotion when it first came out."
no i disagree. I had no idea of the commotion it cause when I read it and was still blown away. The writing is straight up amazing (a matter of personal taste I guess) and the ending is so fucking beautiful it makes me all emotional just thinking about it. If there was sputnikbooks.com Catcher in the Rye would be one of the easiest 5s ever. just my opinion obviously, but yeah i dont think it's overrated at all. |
Killahit
08.03.11 | no its not overrated it's very good, but that first half is just so hard to get past. its rewarding later on |
Aids
08.03.11 | i dunno about the first half being hard to get past. I think the book is insanely accessible. Like, it's the quickest, easiest read ever. |
YetAnotherBrick
08.03.11 | Straight up amazing? I don't know about that, man...
Holden has some good one-liners every now and then, but other than that, no particular phrases, paragraphs, imagery, etc. ever really stood out to me. I may have to read it again, or yeah...like you said, it's just a matter of personal taste. :P |
Aids
08.03.11 | the writing style is just brilliant. the conversational tone, how it feels like Holden is talking to directly to you.
I dunno man, I'm far from the only person who thinks the writing is "straight up amazing." I just took a creative writing class in Uni and Catcher in The Rye was used for examples of good "tone" or whatever (I clearly paid lots of attention in that class) like every day. Pretty sure Salinger's writing style (in "Catcher" in particular) is widely regarded as phenomenal. I fucking love it anyway. But I'm going to bed so no more trying to convince you of this book's awesomeness, for now (but I think if you don't like it right away you never will so yeah haha nevermind) |
toxin.
08.03.11 | It's pretty easy to read, so I don't know what you're talking about.
What I don't like about it is there's really no character development except in Holden, and as a character I actually found him rather insufferable (although that tends to happen when an entire book focuses around the exploits of one character). |
YetAnotherBrick
08.03.11 | ^Yeah, definitely agree with that. |
Satellite
08.03.11 | it's a classic. and for its time it was extremely provocative. |
Aids
08.03.11 | "What I don't like about it is there's really no character development except in Holden"
the entire book takes place over less than a 24-hour period.....how much character development can there be? and Holden is like, the only character that has more than one scene haha what are you even talking about?
ok NOW BED |
Ire
08.03.11 | im gonna fuck that book |
Pharoh
08.03.11 | Im now motivated to buy that book at borders seeing how you people are talking about it, seems pretty good. |
Trebor.
08.03.11 | Catcher In The Rye fucking rules |
toxin.
08.03.11 | @Aids, okay but just because it would have been difficult to have much progression doesn't excuse it from not having any.
And I'm pretty sure turning points in people's lives can happen in mere seconds or minutes, well within the timeframe of what, a 1440 minute book? |
Veldin
08.03.11 | shitty book is shit. |
WhiteNoise
08.03.11 | Might give old Jane a buzz... |
Prolapse
08.03.11 | Such a shitty book... |
Liberi Fatali
08.03.11 | Read it earlier this year for the first time, but can't remember much about it other than the imagery of New York. |
Knott-
08.03.11 | my favourite book man |
Winesburgohio
08.03.11 | lol i love how much backlash it gets from jaded twentysomethings.
It's just a fucking great book through and through |
qwe3
08.03.11 | "What I don't like about it is there's really no character development except in Holden"
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA |
qwe3
08.03.11 | yo dude this is the point --------> .
and this is you ----------> |
Romulus
08.03.11 | book is terrible |
randle
08.03.11 | it's kind of a great book |
Romulus
08.03.11 | like if anyone feels any sort of connection with holden caulfield i kind of feel sorry for you |
qwe3
08.03.11 | don't see why it's terrible. |
Goatlord
08.03.11 | Book is shit. |
americanmusicmachine
08.03.11 | I'm not big on it but it's far better than "a seperate peace" which is what they make you read if you still have people living in your town that think catcher in the rye should be banned from schools. I'm not even fucking kidding we were supposed to read citr in 10th grade but because some pta jackasses raised eneough hell that the school changed their minds and gave us seperate peace instead. and that book is shit man. |
conora
08.03.11 | everyone hates it or loves it |
luschlotz
08.03.11 | I love it. . . |
ffs
08.03.11 | its okay
the only really impressive thing is whoever the author is really knew how to perfectly write like a self absorbed teenage shithead, making it relatable for self absorbed teenage shitheads |
DiceMan
08.03.11 | it's always reminded me so much of Taxi Driver cause the characters of Holden Caulfield and Travis Bickle are so alike |
robertsona
08.03.11 | so much basklash against this book but fucking awesome novel. i think people are convinced you have to "like" holden caulfield to enjoy it or something, lol |
VinVal
08.03.11 | yea it kept reminding me alot of Taxi Driver the characters are pretty much the same good book overall tho |
Satellite
08.03.11 | ugh we had to read a separate peace, too. fucking unbearable. |
BigHans
08.03.11 | Its been probably 12 years since I read it but I remember it being boring as fuck |
omnipanzer
08.03.11 | "Its been probably 12 years since I read it but I remember it being boring as fuck"
Same
"Vision Quest" is often compared to it. |
toxin.
08.03.11 | okay qwe that was probably the worst attempted insult ever.
And if A Separate Peace is anything like A Tale of Two Cities, it must have been fucking terrible.
Seriously, Charles Dickens can go die. It's almost as though he were paid by the number of pages written, instead of the quality of the novel. Oh, wait just a second... |
toxin.
08.03.11 | Yeah I actually like reading. I like Catcher, too. I think the one 'classic' author I hate is Dickens, because he's so terrible. Oh, and Chopin because she's a crazy feminist bitch.
I just read East of Eden and it was like the greatest book ever. |
BigHans
08.03.11 | the greatest book ever is Old Yeller m/ |
Athom
08.03.11 | Sometimes i think that a bunch of sputnikers stopped reading books in 10th grade, then it hits me that
a bunch of sputnikers are still in 10th grade. Holden's a whiny bitch. Go read Gravity's Rainbow you
phonies. |
Satellite
08.03.11 | i suspect that most people in general stopped reading books in 10th grade. |
robertsona
08.03.11 | "Sometimes i think that a bunch of sputnikers stopped reading books in 10th grade, then it hits me
that a bunch of sputnikers are still in 10th grade. Holden's a whiny bitch. Go read Gravity's Rainbow
you phonies."
is this self parody or something lol |
YetAnotherBrick
08.03.11 | As far as classic books go, I'll take To Kill A Mockingbird, The Grapes of Wrath, or Lord of the Flies over Catcher any day. |
Athom
08.03.11 | aren't you in 10th grade? |
robertsona
08.03.11 | i'm going into 11th which i guess is an easy way to dismiss my taste in literature as not having fully
formed or whatever but gravity's rainbow is a big mess of pomo intellectual bullshit whereas catcher
is a great novel that has been dismissed by a bunch of revisionist sillies who think the book lacks
merit because the narrator is a "whiny bitch", lol
but i mean im just a kid!!! |
Trebor.
08.03.11 | I haven't read a book since I graduated
|
YetAnotherBrick
08.03.11 | Going into 11th, yes. Why? Wait, were you talking to me? lol |
omnipanzer
08.03.11 | I don't read nearly as much as I used too :^(
I think the last thing I read was "The Picture of Dorian Gray" and that was a while ago. |
toxin.
08.03.11 | Really? Grapes of Wrath < East of Eden.
Which is weird because most critics apparently disagree. But seriously Grapes of Wrath was pretty terrible too IMO. that's like one more "classic' I don't like. |
sportsboy
08.03.11 | i'm in 10th grade and i thought the book was ok
guys, please, everyone knows holden's a bitch |
YetAnotherBrick
08.03.11 | Grapes of Wrath TERRIBLE? If you don't like it, fine, but TERRIBLE? Come on. |
omnipanzer
08.03.11 | @ Sonic - I liked Henry & June... the movie. |
Romulus
08.03.11 | robertsona legitimate question on the if you don't like holden thing
if i can't relate to him and find him dislikable and find salinger's commentaries through him dull and repetitive and he's basically the only character in the whole novel then how do you get around that and find it insightful or entertaining or whatever |
Athom
08.03.11 | i was talking to robertsona but whatevs.
|
Romulus
08.03.11 | like not trying to be rude but that's a difficult barrier to cross you know? |
YetAnotherBrick
08.03.11 | oh, aight. my bad haha |
toxin.
08.03.11 | Yeah, I thought Grapes of Wrath was utterly unreadable. That, by definition, makes it terrible. |
YetAnotherBrick
08.03.11 | wat |
toxin.
08.03.11 | What do you mean "wat"? His prose was ridiculously boring and the intercalary chapters did nothing except add symbolism which he obviously was too lazy to weave into the story.
Also, the characters were utterly unlikable. Granted this was three years ago, but I don't think my opinion has changed much. |
sportsboy
08.03.11 | my favorite classics are to kill a mockingbird and of mice and men
steinbeck is pretty rad as is hemingway's in our time
kerouac is pretty good too and asimov is great as well
not a big fan of vonnegut though |
robertsona
08.03.11 | i'll admit that it's actually hard for me to explain why i like catcher in the rye. i've always
liked books that sort of attempt to "go into the mind" of their characters, but i like how this
novel works on a bunch of different levels; i.e. how holden thinks out loud, how he acts in spite of
what he may think, or things he thinks that aren't actually present in the narration. i love how he
straddles the line between deep revelations and things we can "connect to" and then really very
whiny and disingenuous things. i think the way holden is never really consistent is brilliant, and
each "side" of his thinking and actions balances each other out. i think his internal whininess and
perhaps misanthropy is what makes the sections on his siblings so heartbreaking, and what lends that
"nervous breakdown" section when he's walking down the street its (at least imo) insane amount of
power. i think a lot of sections in this book show astonishing, bare humanity in the voice of a
teenager, humanity which would be less astonishing had it been anyone less annoying and inconsistent
than holden. a few times salinger sort of projects his intentions but whatever beautiful book really |
YetAnotherBrick
08.03.11 | How the hell are the intercalary chapters not weaved into the story? |
Trebor.
08.03.11 | Good books are good whether you like them or not |
someguest
08.03.11 | ugh we had to read a separate peace, too. fucking unbearable. [2] |
robertsona
08.03.11 | a separate peace was very average idk didnt think it was that bad |
omnipanzer
08.03.11 | Not seeing anyone mention Watership Down so I'll rec it. |
toxin.
08.03.11 | I'll tell you why. A turtle walking across a street and getting run over but nevertheless continuing on the journey has nothing to do with the journey of the Joads. The book does the same thing basically for its entire content, skipping between events pertinent to the Joads and things back in Oklahoma. Some of these are relevant and some of them are not. But I find the entire thing to feel disjointed from the actual plot of the book. I'm sorry but Steinbeck does absolutely nothing to make me give one fuck about the Okies living in the dust bowl, so when it cuts from the main story about the Joads to that, it just feels like an interruption instead of a continuation.
On the same note, another fault of the book is that the Joads are as a group so unbearable that you feel no sympathy for them at all. The only thing remotely emotional (at least to me, obviously) was when the Jesus Christ symbol/allusion preacher guy died (if I recall correctly). |
robertsona
08.03.11 | mrs dalloway! |
sixthgoldenticket
08.03.11 | ham on rye is a better book guys amirite |
Trebor.
08.03.11 | Hop On Pop is still my favorite |
Knott-
08.03.11 | I really like Holden but I love the book so much because I'm NOT like him.. much. But there are days that I am and the book reminds me to keep those to a minimum. |
CrackwhoreBatshit
08.03.11 | I once rolled papers with that book if that helps settle this debate. |
qwe3
08.04.11 | "the only really impressive thing is whoever the author is really knew how to perfectly write like a self absorbed teenage shithead, making it relatable for self absorbed teenage shitheads"
Salinger's prose is unique and pretty blunt but it's brilliant in how effective it is. the way he describes the dude in his class' mother when she's smoking and talking to Holden is one of my fav moments in literature. also the little anecdotes and characters that pop up along the way all supplement the story so well. I love the little revelatory aspects of his writing, like when he talks about his brother really early on in the book but only by calling him a prostitute. i like how you get more bits of information on his life like that but only really when it's topical in Holden's mind.
also gonna back up robertsona so hard on the point about not having to relate to holden to enjoy the book, but i'd go one step further by saying you don't have to be like holden to relate to him.
"okay qwe that was probably the worst attempted insult ever."
it wasn't an attempted insult, it was me telling you you'd missed the point. i.e. it takes place over a day and it revolves around one constant character and all the others come and go so why would you lambast something for not having things that it isn't supposed to and that would be unrealistic given the book's context |
robertsona
08.04.11 | "also gonna back up robertsona so hard on the point about not having to relate to holden to enjoy the book, but i'd go one step further by saying you don't have to be like holden to relate to him. "
the 2nd was more what i was saying, actually. i just think that so many people complain that they don't "like" holden which seems like a bizarrely elementary approach to narrative and character as a reader |
Romulus
08.04.11 | how would you enjoy the book without identifying with holden? salinger's prose doesn't deviate from holden's perception; i don't see how you could appreciate it without any appreciation of the character |
qwe3
08.04.11 | @robertsona well i can sort of understand why in this case since he narrates the entire book and if you don't like the narrator its p hard to digest, but there are so many things that happen to him that people can relate to without having to like him e.g. the whole prostitute scene which is such a great passage actually. |
Winesburgohio
08.04.11 | People who say that Catcher in the Rye is juvenile or whatever have only given it a superficial read.
Also Don DeLillo>Thomas Pynchon. Underworld is phenomenal. |
qwe3
08.04.11 | "how would you enjoy the book without identifying with holden? salinger's prose doesn't deviate from holden's perception; i don't see how you could appreciate it without any appreciation of the character"
the way holden describes things is interesting. his descriptions of new york, central park, the various people he meets/has met, descriptions of his school are all very interesting. You don't have to identify with Holden to appreciate how well the author's done to so fully realise him and his surroundings. When you read, you don't just read about his school, you read a teenager's opinion of that school. I like that, some people prefer reliable narrators.
And what do you mean by "identifying with" holden |
Romulus
08.04.11 | i can't really reference scenes to be honest but yeah your first point is more or less what it boils down to for me |
Winesburgohio
08.04.11 | Are you serious Romulus?
Oh boy. |
Romulus
08.04.11 | ah that was at your last comment I'll get to the next one later i'm so bad at sputnikmobile and don't feel like typing paragraphs about this |
ffs
08.04.11 | i wasnt putting down salinger's writing, i was being serious when i said it was impressive how he wrote it in the "mindset" of a teenager. and i didnt mean that i disliked the character either, maybe calling him a shithead was a bit over the top
what i meant is that i liked the way that salinger wrote a teenager who postured like he had all these big ideals and ideas, but ultimately not even he really knew what he stood for. i would have really dug him and the book when i was a teenager |
toxin.
08.04.11 | Qwe, the things you're talking about in your post don't necessarily impress everyone. Maybe that's the difference between you and me. You've admitted there's nothing in terms of development there. What you like about the book consists of subtleties that maybe catch your eyes but can just as easily do nothing for other readers.
That's my main gripe. You can like it for your personal reasons. It's like music; you can like ______ due to some particular lyric really getting you or a melody being particularly catchy or whatever, but that doesn't mean it has the universal appeal (and by universal, I mean a vast majority, like TDAGARIM on Sputnik).
Just because I didn't find Salinger's description of Holden's mom noteworthy doesn't make my opinion any less right than yours. For me personally, either the characters have to be interesting or the plot has to be interesting. And don't get me wrong, I like Catcher, too, as a quick read. But is it something I think is good & deep enough to analyze and read about? No, and its faults are what I've already said.
For some reason, I think you think that what you find in a book is what everyone else looks in a book, too. That's obviously not the case; look at the split opinions on Catcher. There's more merit to my argument than what other people said. And yes, it is possible to like a book even if you dislike the character (like in the Harry Potter series, I found Harry to be rather self-important at times, even if it was justified), but it certainly helps if your main character is likeable. It IS a legitimate argument; maybe not as a whole but as a supporting reason on why you don't like the book. |
toxin.
08.04.11 | K there are some typos in their that I don't want to edit, like "There's more merit to my argument that what you've said" instead of what was written. |
qwe3
08.04.11 | Lol I'm on a phone atm can't reply properly but lol |
toxin.
08.04.11 | Don't worry lol It's not that big of a deal. I respect the fact that you enjoy the book. /conversation |
Killahit
08.04.11 | 100+ of pure ownage. Thanks guys |
toxin.
08.04.11 | You're welcome. I necro-posted (kinda) like four times hahah |
Killahit
08.04.11 | I enjoy the book, personally, when you read it without expectation. I think that if you read it expecting one of the greatest books about an angsty, hostile, and self-absorbed teenager, and one of the greatest pieces of literature in the 20th century (this is required for 21st century high school English class), you'll be disappointed. You just need to read this quick, 200+ page book in one day, and that's all you need. You'll come back to it. The reason I said the first half is hard to get by, is because it feels very disjointed and needs time to build. The second half is generally better, especially the ending. But Holdon doesn't change. He still encourages smoking / drugs / rebelling, forces himself to live in a mental hospital, and begins to miss everybody instead of regretting his actions. But it's an amazing ending, one of the best in American literature. It's just not a book that met my high expectations, but it came closer than most "universally acclaimed" novels. |
sifFlammable
08.04.11 | dude xtoxin lol
yeah i dont know i found salinger's writing to be really concise and effective but the overall story about the self absorbed holden pretty boring so hmm |
qwe3
08.04.11 | xtoxin i understand the subjective nature of art but disliking something for not having something that it would be retarded to have is nonsensical
how much character development do you expect from peripheral characters over a 24 hour period? Holden is the only character who develops at all because he's the only one we see enough of to observe development.
"I think you think that what you find in a book is what everyone else looks in a book, too. "
that's interesting but sadly incorrect
|
toxin.
08.04.11 | qwe, k, but for the record, that was only one reason.
sifFlammable, k it took me like five minutes to type out anyways lol.
|
qwe3
08.04.11 | it was also the first point you made, which sorta led me to believe it was the most notable flaw in your opinion but yeah agree/disagree etc |
