I don't like it at all.

No, everybody is pretending.

I hated Holden. He's a spoiled, snotty little boy with an ego complex. I find it fascinating that it's on so many school reading lists because it's supposed to be an insight into the mind of a teenaged boy, yet I can't recall a single book from a teenaged girl's point of view being required reading. Maybe things are different now, I graduated a long time ago.

I had the same thoughts about Holden. He keeps calling everyone a “phony”, yet he himself isn’t that great. Also I don’t think this is a great insight into the mind of a teenage boy, since Holden isn’t a normal teenage boy. He is heavily traumatized and in need of help, and he constantly refuses to address issues with himself.

I'd agree, I'm just parroting what many teachers have told me about why it's on the syllabus.

I've never finished it. I hated it that much.

A great book Holden is telling this story from a mental institution. He recounts a time when he was probably suffering PTSD from the death of his brother, he has little relationship with his parents, they ship him off to a boarding school, the only adult in his life who gives him any sort of guidance gropes him in his sleep, he alludes to the fact stuff like this has happened before. He is a very troubled kid trying to make some sense of the world.

I think the way this book is taught in high school is way off base

[deleted]

Why do we have to like a character to enjoy a book, or to recognize why it matters? Yes, Holden is whiny, he's meant to be, but in terms of being disaffected and thinking everything is phony, most teenagers experience this (though perhaps not at Holden's level) at some point, so his stance is a universal one. This book was written in the 50's, when their were few real ways for teenagers to rebel; they were expected to fit a specific mold, and never question authority, so Holden does not fit in the world in which he lives (again, a feeling many of us, teenagers and not, can relate to).

Catcher is not even close to my favorite book, but there is a certainly a reason it stands the test of time.

This is a valid point, syllabi are still often weighed heavily toward men; that doesn't detract from the book; however. I think a book from a teenaged girl's POV should indeed be taught; if you have any suggestions, please let me know; I know I have read some, and they've been great, but I can't recall them off the top of my head.

The book is fine but I really found Holden whiny and annoying. I don't understand why this book gets so much love. I wonder if I would have felt differently if I'd read it as a teenager but I was in my 30's and I just couldn't stand Holden.

I discussed it with someone who read it when it originally came out and they said at the time people loved the main character because no one had ever written a teenager like that. All other teenage characters were perfect but Holden felt real to them.

The part where he's a hypocrite is actually a strength. A protagonist doesn't need to be likable for you to empathize with them.

I'll be honest I haven't read much YA in the past few years so I'd not be the best person to recommend. Any librarians want to chime in? Haha

I much preferred Franny and Zooey

It's an unpleasant book, deliberately so. It's the POV of an annoying little shit with a lot of mental problems. He's an irritating character, so it's not fun to spend time with him.

This book is similar to Lolita in that both books put you inside the head of an unpleasant person. Of course, in the case of Humbert Humbert, he's evil and criminal, as well as unpleasant.

Kill John Lennon

I like it. But I never saw the MC as an "annoying little shit" or anything like that, the guy's dream is to save kids from getting traumatized like he was, his coping mechanisms are just really very bad. He's a child himself going through a crisis.

But I fully agree some things aged like milk, and some things were not handled very well to begin with.

Your first point is one of my biggest gripes when it comes to discussing books with other people. Everyone seems to think that all main characters should be good and likable with minor flaws. Boring. Morally ambiguous characters are my favorite, because when they are well-written, they bring realism and moral questions to the story. Characters can and should be unlikeable sometimes. They should challenge our perspectives or present us with realities that we don't usually see.

I don't have to like Humbert Humbert or anything he says or does to see that Lolita is an exceptionally well written book. The unreliable narrator makes you question the story they're telling you, making you engage with the context clues in the story more.

Creator’s on YouTube?! Who gives a shit! Read what you like… and also you don’t get it, it is a classic, it’s bloody amazing. Your loss

I agree entirely, I love Lolita even though Humbert disgust me because I don't have to relate to the protagonist to enjoy reading. And I think most real humans are morally ambiguous at some point or another, so characters without deep flaws are unrealistic and poor writing.

I agree with everything you said, actually, "challenge our perspectives..." which is exactly the point of good literature, beyond entertainment, it forces us to confront unpleasant realities, and by proxy, ourselves.

It's such an elegant little novella with very little it that is extraneous. We have all, to some degree, been as callow as Holden, albeit in different ways.

I strongly dislike this book.

I read it recently and really like it. I found the style interesting and engaging and it was a great snapshot of the past. Also funny!

Loved the book!

Love Catcher in the Rye. I think it is much more gauged towards certain age groups and reading it as an adult is likely different than as a similar-aged teen. I read it when I was probably 14 or so the first time and really enjoyed it. Gave me a lot to think about at that age. My sons also enjoyed it in their teens. I don't really have an issue separating a an older book's issues compared to current times. I just read books for what they are, when they are without applying today's concepts and ideologies.

Haven't read it in a while but I loved it. I was also a teen struggling with mental health issues and unresolved trauma.

Maybe I'll add it to the reread list this year

Does anyone actually likes one of the most celebrated novels in history???

I don't like, so how can anyone else like it???

I haven’t read it since high school and absolutely didn’t like it. Maybe I should try it again as an adult.

Yes! It drives me crazy when someone critiques a book by saying the main character isn't likable. For God's sake, most people aren't likable.

Franny & Zooey is better.

How old is OP? It might hit differently if you're too old

[removed]

I was in hugh school when i read it and i hated it.

I read it in my teen and thought he was insufferable. I did not enjoy reading that. I felt like the book was trying to envoke sympathy or whatever but it had the opposite effect.

Yes we all do, society does, did she put her rook in the back, I don’t know I have her the time , Salinger is a minor god to most US intellectuals

Well said.

I read it at 17 and wasn't impressed. I can barely recall anything about it year later.

Yes, I love it. It's a realistic and nuanced portrayal of grief, sometimes you need that. I actually find him very relatable given the character's circumstances.

I did not.

No, he's a whiny brat

Love it. It's a book about a messed up kid (from things like his brother recently dying of luekema, going to a boarding school where students are bullied to suicide (one he witnessed)) and nobody really seems to he there to help him with any of this, so he fantasized about helping keep other kids from experiencing the same as a maladaptive coping mechanism. But this window into this kids head, and how he tries to and (imo) begins to process his experience and begin to accept them, are super compelling to me. Folks who call him an annoying kid either were probably forced to read it while they were also an 'annoying' child or they're just unwilling or unable to empathize with this poor kid and just see the immature (after all he's 16) coping mechanisms and reactions to the society he lived in.

[removed]

Yes. The majority of people that have ready it like it.

I love it and always will. I love Holden, warts and all. He is delightfully human and most teens are every bit as annoying, self-pitying and self important as Holden is. But most teens are also just as sensitive, funny and capable of touching insight and tenderness.

Of course he’s an annoying little shit. I used to be one myself. Maybe I still am. My point is: Holden contains multitudes, just like all of us.

It's a good one, I don't think we have to like the character in order to enjoy the book. It's actually boring for me when main character is always a good guy and all those typical things.

I know a guy who knows a guy that does. I think I heard about another guy, as well.

He left the foils on the goddam subway…

absolutely and well put.

Holden was me in highschool. so so angry at the world. I was probably somewhat annoying too. Holden is traumatized and actively going through more trauma. he’s just a kid. I have a lot of sympathy for him.

The title of this thread actually resembles something Holden would say. Except Holden probably would have italicized something. "Does anyone actually like the Catcher in the Rye?"

I don't love the book, but respect it. Think it suffers from.sienfield syndrome. Revolutionary at its time, but a trope now, because the revolutionary parts have been copied, parodied and referenced to death

[deleted]

Idk I liked it. It's a good view into toxic masculinity from the perspective of a severely mentally ill teenage boy who's been repeatedly traumatized. He's a total shitter and at times incel light but he's also realizes how much he sucks and doesn't want to be the way he is.

For the 1950's this is a pretty unique perspective, especially since the audience is supposed to dislike him yet sympathize with his misplaced rage both toward himself and the world.

I didn’t appreciate it until I was in my mid-late twenties.

I liked it when I was 14. It was entirely because of being allowed to say sonofabitch in class. I don't know if I'd like it today.

Catcher In the Rye is a book that breathes loneliness. No, it's not a comfortable read, but it was never meant to be. Layered over the top of this reality are issues related to profanity, dishonesty, atheism, alcoholism, sexual promiscuity, and homosexuality. Meaning-human society. Believe it or not, at one time (1978) it was banned in some schools in Washington that tagged it as subversive (communism). Other bans were attempted in 1963 for whatever...Although the book was written for adults, it has most often been a teaching tool in high schools. Holden's gray hair on one side of his head has been thought to symbolize his growth from innocence toward a mature adult. The book leaves open both questions of innocence and maturity for Holden and other characters.

That one of the things that makes ASOIAF so interesting.

Are they creators?

I liked it. Read it like 15 years ago though, and I was a pretentious 15 year old.

I had almost the exact same reaction. Perhaps if it wasn't so hyped, I would have approached it differently. I wondered if it was the kind of thing that was unique in its day, but just didn't translate now. I read it several years ago, so my memory is not crisp, but it certainly didn't make me want to read more Salinger.

I think it's one of the greatest examples of good first person narration. You really get into Holdens head in Catcher in the Rye. The story basically doesn't have a plot, let's be honest, why people like it is because the main character is interesting.