[might contain spoiler]
Theme: Classics, Young Adult, Coming-of-age
First published in 1951
The Catcher in the Rye tells the story of Holden Caulfield, a teenage boy who got himself sacked out of school after flunking four subjects. Christmas vacation wasn't due in a few days, and he didn't feel like telling his parents anyway, so he packed his bags and wandered around the New York city. This story entails his thoughts and the people he met in the span of the few nights; his teacher Mr Spencer, a classmate's mother on the train, girls in the club, a prostitute, his old friend Sally, a senior at his old school Carl Luce, his little sister Phoebe, and Mr Antolini.
Personal thoughts:
It was very boring, to be honest. I bought a copy from a gal on Threads for cheap and I didn't even know what it was about. But I've heard of the title, and it's a famous book, so I thought "why not give it a try". Fair to say I don't like the story. It was too plain to my liking.
To start off, I think the writing prose is fine. It's written in the post-WWII era therefore the language is easy to understand. None of those poetic and formal dialogues stuff. A lot of slangs were used, too. As this is written in the POV of a teenager, I can say the writer did a good job in capturing the essence of a teenager's mind; fiery but scared, wanting to look cool, slightly nerdy and his thoughts an array of scattered contradictions.
As I said, the story is too plain and this is clearly a matter of preference, I must say. I had always enjoyed books with climactic and dramatic stories with a good plot twist and a little spilt blood here and there. Books where they always had something going on every page.
But there are good bits of this book that I actually like. I love learning new words and slangs they used. Some of the peculiar ones I found in particular:
dough -> a slang for money, existed since early 1900s.
crook -> thieves, con artist, dishonest people
undertaking parlors -> funeral homes
horsing around -> fooling around, behaving in a silly way
can -> slang for toilet/bathroom
sock/take a sock -> hit, punch
flit -> gay
cold as a witch's teat
About Holden, I think of him as an immature boy, slightly in the average social teenage class; not too nerdy and definitely not hot, thinks everyone else is a phony, full of contradictions; he said one thing and did another, acting all tough but in reality he's just a lonely guy. He had two older brothers; one is alive and well writing scripts for Hollywood, another is dead, and a younger sister Phoebe whom he adored a lot.
Addressing other claims about the book:
I've seen a lot of reviews saying this book is revolutionary and rebellious, and I personally DO NOT understand which part of it is revolutionary lol. People saying they are "blown away" and that the only good thing in their life is that they read this book......... bro bffr
Some says it's philosophical-ish how Holden represent every other child in this world who got betrayed by authorities and adults and learning how to take his steps in this cruel world, all while carrying the grief of losing his brother.
I mean......... this is where I said it's really a matter of people's preferences. Because wdym it's philosophical..... It's really just a story about Holden. Stop reading too much into it lol. This kinda reminds me of that joke where we would learn poems in English class and the teacher said "look at the first line 'the sky is blue'. blue here means the poet's sorrow of his wife's death" all the while what the poet actually meant by 'the sky is blue' is probably that 'the sky is blue'.
The book had previously been banned and restricted in America due to its references to sexual exploration, swear words, promoting bad behaviour (smoking, drinking), contained anti-authoritarian motives and mental health exploration.
How do one decide to ban a book? Is this common in America or other parts of the world too? I honestly can't imagine banning this book. There are other books you should ban, had you think if it's 'too woke'. But this? This is the opposite of whatever the reason.
Sexual exploration? The book only mentions Holden wanted to have sex, but chickened out soon after. It doesn't even contain explicit scenes. Swear words? The worst he said was 'bastard' if that's even an insult. But I getddit, the 50s were different. The anti-authoritarian part? Laughable. No one who read the book would suddenly declare a war with the government. Wouldn't even cross their mind. Mental health exploration? Not really. It was insinuated that he was grieving his brother's death, but that's as far as it is. But okay, I will concur on this one.
All in all, I think a specific audience would enjoy this book. I wouldn't say it's a bad book. Nope, just bad for me. And if you're thinking of reading, ummmmmmm I would say......... a BIG NO LOL. There are better books out there.
