I recently decided to read the book "Catcher in the Rye". It is a highly regarded book in our society, and many people consider it one of the greatest novels in western literature. I however, was not a fan.
For those who have not read the book, here is a short summary:
The novel starts by introducing the main character, Holden Caulfield. Holden is in a hospital for people with tuberculosis, and he is retelling his story to the audience.
He was in a private school for boys called Pencey, but was kicked out because he flunked all of his classes (except English). This had been the fourth school he was kicked out of. Not wanting to go home and face his parents, he stayed in New York for a few days. He decided that if he could hold off until Christmas break, which was only a few days away, he would be fine.
(For a more detailed plot summary, there is a handy video on Sparknotes.)
Why didn't I like this book? For one, it was absolutely not what I expected. Because it is so highly acclaimed, I expected it to be some brilliant allegory relating to social anxiety, young rebellion, and the nature of the teen spirit. Instead, it seemed to be about an immature and depressed kid whose story had no significant purpose.
Also, there was little to no character development. Holden is a very immature boy and he even said so in the novel. " .....I act quite young for my age sometimes. I was sixteen then, and I'm seventeen now, and some times I act like I'm about thirteen." (Salinger) You'd think after flunking out of his fourth school, and being homeless in New York for almost a week, he would have learned some life lessons and "grown up" a little. I think it would have been a much better novel if there had been stronger themes of character development. I felt that the lack of character development made the story line seem pointless.
I've found that this book is extremely overrated in it's popularity. I could see how some people might enjoy it, but I don't see it as the radical novel that it's so frequently made out to be. As you can see, this book was just not my cup of tea.
For those who have not read the book, here is a short summary:
The novel starts by introducing the main character, Holden Caulfield. Holden is in a hospital for people with tuberculosis, and he is retelling his story to the audience.
He was in a private school for boys called Pencey, but was kicked out because he flunked all of his classes (except English). This had been the fourth school he was kicked out of. Not wanting to go home and face his parents, he stayed in New York for a few days. He decided that if he could hold off until Christmas break, which was only a few days away, he would be fine.
(For a more detailed plot summary, there is a handy video on Sparknotes.)
Why didn't I like this book? For one, it was absolutely not what I expected. Because it is so highly acclaimed, I expected it to be some brilliant allegory relating to social anxiety, young rebellion, and the nature of the teen spirit. Instead, it seemed to be about an immature and depressed kid whose story had no significant purpose.
Also, there was little to no character development. Holden is a very immature boy and he even said so in the novel. " .....I act quite young for my age sometimes. I was sixteen then, and I'm seventeen now, and some times I act like I'm about thirteen." (Salinger) You'd think after flunking out of his fourth school, and being homeless in New York for almost a week, he would have learned some life lessons and "grown up" a little. I think it would have been a much better novel if there had been stronger themes of character development. I felt that the lack of character development made the story line seem pointless.
I've found that this book is extremely overrated in it's popularity. I could see how some people might enjoy it, but I don't see it as the radical novel that it's so frequently made out to be. As you can see, this book was just not my cup of tea.