I struggled through “Catcher in the Rye” one time about 30 years ago and wondered what the heck all the fuss was about.
It ranged between utterly incomprehensible to totally boring.
I read it in high school and again at 29 years. What an absolute waste of time. Another one of those books that’s a “classic” merely because everyone says so.
Never read it, but I guess you're not the right one to ask... *\;-)
I was an English Lit major and Salinger was out of style in the early 70's. I finally read "Catcher" a few years ago. I can understand that it might have been a book that might have affected me a great deal more at 18. I certainly never had the skill to write its equal.
Me, too. I didn’t get it....oh, the teenaged preppie angst!
What was ‘incomprehensible’ about it? It’s written in very forthright prose.
It is highly over-rated.
The left is trying to tie the novel and Salinger to the beatnik and population-gap group of writers.
The truth is, for anyone who actually studies literature, he didn’t do anything all that original or great.
He was a good writer. He wrote a good rejecting-coming-of-age novel. That’s about the extent of it.
I've read it about 4 times and its never knocked me down as overly brilliant but I still enjoy the prose, however Salinger's "Raise High the Roof Beam, Carpenters" is one of my favorite reads and has a prominent place on my "emergency book" bookshelf.
(When I can find nothing new to read I choose something from my "emergency book" bookshelf...)
Anything in it that would make you want to shoot a rock star?