# Has Catcher in the Rye deeply affected anyone of you?



## panicnight26 (Jun 13, 2009)

My whole childhood was so awkward, and I never fit in because I was so different then everyone else, I wan't interested in sports like football and soccar, I was interested in things like art and music. I was a mediocre student, while everyone around me would freak out when they got a A- on something. I was so different that I was isolated and considered weird and I sort of stopped being social altogether. I got depressed, and even suicidal for few years during elementary school. I didn't connect with anyone, not even my parents. I couldn't talk to anyone about the way I felt. I hated the majority of everyone. They all just seemed to be so mean, so focused on being on top. When I saw a group of friends laughing over some stupid thing, just being "silly", it would anger me. When a guy would date a girl just to run up to his friends the next day and tell them about it, it would depress me. My life was absolute hell, I felt as if the world was created for everyone but me. But I felt as if I truly had a friend (I know that sounds stupid) when I read The Catcher in the Rye for the first time in ninth grade. Holden Caulfield just hit the nail right on the head. His conception of the world was so spot on; jackasses thrive to live happy and create more jackasses, while the good ones, the ones who don't pretend to be something they're not, are looked down upon and considered "punks". Holden was left to rot in a mental instution, after about two hundred and twenty pages of explanation of why he's the only sane person around. And the story was never sugarcoated. It didn't end with something dumb like Holden finally finding the perfect girl, or finally setting things right with school and his parents. No, it was a perfect portrait of reality; things don't end on a good note. The novel completely turned my world upside down. It made me stop feeling unsatisfied and dissapointed with the "innequities" of my life, and made me feel proud of them. Proud of being different, and proud of being "weird". It made me feel not like I was better than everyone, but that that everyone was just lost and I was the only person who truly knew where I was going. The Catcher in the Rye is the only book I can truly take seriously and not consider "just a book". It's more than that to me.


----------



## Lord Raiden (Jun 13, 2009)

I remember being forced to read this for a literature class.  I know a lot of people say it was a great book, but I don't think I stopped twitching until weeks after the class was over.  >.<


----------



## The Wrong Writer (Jun 13, 2009)

Agreed.  It was OK in lit class.  Little boring, but not as much Silas Marner and Moby Dick and that other crap.
But I've never understood all the people raving about what a great book it was.  Wonder what they'd think if they read it again now.


----------



## strangedaze (Jun 13, 2009)

Never got the whole Catcher in the Rye thing either. I like his short stories waaaay better.


----------



## Mike C (Jun 13, 2009)

Lord Raiden said:


> I remember being forced to read this for a literature class.



I'd suggest anyone forced to read it in college re-read it for pleasure. Your opinion may turn out to be quite different. It is actually a very good book.


----------



## Dr. Malone (Jun 13, 2009)

Great book, but it didn't deeply affect me on any level.


----------



## seigfried007 (Jun 13, 2009)

I don't get the fascination with it either. Maybe, if I'd read it as an angsty teenager, I'd enjoy it more and think it meant something, but, as an adult with actual responsibilities who is trying to raise children up in the best way I know, it's kind of insulting and worthy of much eye-rolling.


----------



## Dr. Malone (Jun 13, 2009)

If a certain Catcher fan had killed McCartney instead of Lennon, I'd probably be a bigger fan of the book.


----------



## RogueGunslinger (Jun 13, 2009)

*Nope.*



> Has Catcher in the Rye deeply affected anyone of you?



Not in the slightest.


----------



## Robosquad (Jun 15, 2009)

It's an amazing book, but I don't think I can say that anything I've read has "deeply affected" me.  There are a lot of things I hold as very emotional, incredible pieces of art.  But I would never change my actions or lifestyle to suit them.



Lord Raiden said:


> I remember being forced to read this for a literature class. I know a lot of people say it was a great book, but I don't think I stopped twitching until weeks after the class was over. >.<


WRONG.


----------



## Tom88 (Aug 17, 2009)

I'm glad you connected with it panicnight. I would never mock anyone for feeling such a feeling, I think it's great. It's the ultimate accolade to a writer. And it's inspiring to know that an author's fan base can be truly moved or affected by a piece of literature. It would probably be a far more commonplace sentiment if books were more prevalent in today's culture than television and other technologies.

I read _Catcher _as a leisure read, on a recommendation from a friend, before I knew anything about the insane following it has, or how ingrained it is in popular culture. 
I'm glad I did too, because my fondness for it has started to decline since learning of its status. 
It never _meant _anything to me. I just found it an entertaining short read that was worth the time, but I moved onto bigger and better things. Learning that it became something of an emo handbook for a generation of apathetic teenagers sorta makes me cringe. I need to learn to not let my opinion be swayed by external influences, I guess.


For the record the only book to really mean anything to me is On The Road.


----------



## Heid (Sep 7, 2009)

Mike C said:


> I'd suggest anyone forced to read it in college re-read it for pleasure. Your opinion may turn out to be quite different. It is actually a very good book.



I read it for pleasure first. Then had to re-read it for university a few years later. It's pretty good, I just don't see the hype in it...


----------



## SevenWritez (Sep 7, 2009)

I was never an outcast at my school but had my deep (and sometimes very unfair) suspicions about my friends and classmates, considering them fake or immoral and essentially going through the stage when I believed to know all the world's dark secrets.

When I first read Catcher in the Rye, I was in that stage, and I identified with it. I read it again about four months ago, and having matured a bit from when I was 16, I am still impressed by it, not because of its ability to speak to troubled youth but because of many of the things Salinger achieves that might not be apparent on a first read-through. It's something that should be read first for pleasure, and then again for study. 

That said, I do believe it is overrated to the point that it has eclipsed his other works, which are all gems themselves. I suggest you read Seymour: an Introduction, and his short story "A Perfect Day for Banana Fish."

Among others, of course.


----------



## Mike C (Sep 8, 2009)

It had a similar effect on me at a similar age, for similar reasons.

It may appear overrated now, but seen on the context of it's time, it was a major groundbreaker.

I have to agree on bananafish though, one of my all time favourite shorts. In fact his Glass family shorts collectively are superb.


----------



## Squalid Glass (Sep 10, 2009)

Dr. Malone said:


> If a certain Catcher fan had killed McCartney instead of Lennon, I'd probably be a bigger fan of the book.



Oh come on... not a Wings fan, I suppose? 

Catcher is just about my favorite book (although cuckoo's nest, I don't think, will ever be passed on my list). In all honesty I agree with the person who said Salinger's short stories are better. I never really identified with Holden, but I do think as far as style goes (especially dialogue) it is a freaking masterpiece. Did it deeply affect me? Hmm, not in terms of self identification. But in terms of wanting to become more serious about my writing and getting more into writing, yes, it did a lot for me. I think Salinger, although he gets a lot of credit, deserves more credit.

And bananafish is nothing short of perfect.


----------



## Skye Jules (Sep 19, 2009)

I wasn't that fond of the book. He was just another whiny teenager who brought everything upon himself. It would have been different had he been in a situation out of his control. But he had control of every situation. He just chose not to do anything about it.


----------



## tikiman53 (Nov 15, 2009)

Catcher in the Rye was one of those few books that the school assigns that actually leaves me with something amazing. It's not even that the plot is great. The plot is so mundane and even boring. But it was Holden's character. I dunno, I could just really relate to him. Maybe it's because I'm a teenager, but when I was reading that book, I found myself saying, "I've been saying that for years too!" 

Amazing character. He's so troubled and so misunderstood. I think we all have that Holden phase in our lives when we grow up and we realize that the world isn't all rainbows and butterflies. That people die and kill and have evil thoughts.

Great book


----------



## Mr. Madeleine (Nov 15, 2009)

It is a good read but I wouldn't call it great literature nor could I say that it has deeply affected me.


----------



## Edgewise (Nov 15, 2009)

Good book, but didn't effect me on a deep emotional level.

Ask the Dust, however, flirts with similar themes, and I was moved within an inch of tears at moments during that one.


----------



## Ilasir Maroa (Nov 15, 2009)

I despise that book, so I won't comment on whether I thought the writing was good.

I also despised Holden as a character.  What an angsty little prat.  And that's coming from me as an angsty little prat myself when I read it.  The book didn't move me at all, and I only read it because it was assigned for class.  And don't try that bullshit "read it now for pleasure" line on me.  There were books I read for class that I absolutely loved.  I judge a book on its merits, not my situation.


----------



## Sam (Nov 15, 2009)

Read it in high school and thought it was boring. 

Read it in college and thought it was boring. 

Read it for myself a few years later, and still thought it was boring. 

But I'm not a huge fan of "literary masterpieces". I've read quite a few of them, and the only one that I remotely enjoyed was Orwell's _1984. _


----------



## Edgewise (Nov 15, 2009)

We read almost nothing worth reading in high school English (aside from Shakespeare, but those are theater).  Steinbeck's Grapes was ok, but only in retrospect.  I hated it at the time.  Then there was Charles fucking Dickens and Charlotte Bronte...they could have had us read For Whom The Bell Tolls.  Instead we got Tale of Two Cities and Black Boy.  SMFH.


----------



## spider8 (Nov 16, 2009)

I really enjoyed Catcher because of the writing but now can hardly remember anything about it. I think HC's ( was it Holden Caulfield?)brother had been killed which depressed him and this encouraged resentment for others, happier than himself. His troubles were endangering him turning into a misfit. Was it set over three days? A prostitute, and a pimp hitting HC in the stomach. But it's so long since I read it, I'm not sure now.


----------



## Kyle R (May 23, 2012)

The pimp flicked him in the nuts.

I remember sporadic moments of _Catcher_, including how he remembered the girl from his past always kept her kings on the back row, and his jealousy over his roommate taking her on a date. I remember him explaining the book's title and how he wanted to catch children before they fell over a cliff in the rye.

I vaguely remember him visiting a professor's house and having a conversation.

Also, when spending time with the young hooker, he wanted to talk to her, to get to know her, instead of take advantage of her.

I think what makes the book so acclaimed is the sentiment it arose in people such as the original poster of this thread. The character is an outcast, a lost soul that some readers can relate to. He also carries a message that is very anti-society, not exactly a common motif in popular literature, especially in the time it was written. It was heradled as "ground breaking", an exploration of teenage angst and all the things that polite, well-adjusted people believe should be left unsaid, or even un_thought_, as what normal person in their right mind would reject society to wander off on their own?

Of course the idea nowdays isn't so new. Vagrants and dropouts are a regular fixture of society, but Holden romanticized the path, presenting his rejection of society as an ideal, something to be disdained, or applauded as heroic, depending on the reader's perspective. 

An anti-hero in a world of phonies, or a lost soul to be looked down upon?


----------



## Bachelorette (May 27, 2012)

> If a certain Catcher fan had killed McCartney instead of Lennon, I'd probably be a bigger fan of the book.



I lol'd.

Seriously though, what I think turns so many people off from that book is that Holden is clearly suffering from depression, and depressed people, let's face it, just aren't any fun to be around. I should know - I am one, and half the time I can't stand MYSELF because of it (haha, see what I mean?!) He's depressed, if I recall correctly, over the death of his little brother, the suicide of his friend from school, and from overall disillusionment with the adult world. 

Granted, Salinger might not have specifically intended to portray Holden as mentally ill - Glass, you'd probably know that sooner than I would - but that's how I've always read it. Others have said he was actually suffering from post-traumatic stress disorder. Whatever the case, if taken in that light, those who have sympathy for the mentally ill, or are so themselves, will probably find that it's a very realistic portrayal of that kind of mindset, regardless of whether or not you "like" Holden.

Having said all that, I don't mean to imply that EVERYONE who relates to Holden is mentally ill. Just like not everyone who reads the book goes out and shoots a Beatle...


----------



## Winston (May 27, 2012)

I don't know if the book has aged as well as other works of literature.  Yet I still see an enduring value to Salinger's perspective.

I appreciate it as a snapshot of what it was to be like "out of lockstep" in a time when being different wasn't as acceptable.  We all know the pain and awkwardness of being a teenager.  Today, we have the Internet.  Holden did not.

How he dealt with life is not meant to be a template, nor is the story supposed to motivate or inspire.  Like any art, the value you place on it is more of a reflection of yourself than the piece itself.


----------



## newkidintown (Jun 2, 2012)

I'm reading it now, and I really like it a lot. Then again, I never was forced to read it for anything; I just remember a friend saying it was good and picked it up on a trip to the bookstore for summer reading material. I was really surprised; for a book sitting amongst the "ye"s and "thou"s of the bookstore, it's incredibly honest and unique for its time. I don't know how much I relate to it; I just love the voice.  

I also didn't really know anything about it's status, actually; really, I thought it was a pretty obscure read. Guess I was wrong about that, haha.


----------



## FirstTimeNovelist (Oct 27, 2012)

It was a good book and while I identified with Holden, I don't think the book is worth the hype that it gets.


----------



## Morkonan (Oct 28, 2012)

/shrug

Catcher wasn't all that inspirational for me. I enjoyed it and thought it was well done, deserving of its praise. But, other than that, it didn't serve to inspire me. I was more effected by "Of Mice and Men" than "Catcher in the Rye."


----------



## Burlesk (Dec 5, 2012)

Reading through the posts here, it appears that one's appreciation of _Catcher_ depends on whether one identifies and empathises with Holden or not. It has a lot going for it aside from that (as a portrait of New York c. 1950 it's interesting), but if you don't 'get' Holden, you won't get the novel. And to really get Holden, you have to be like him - not fit in the world, and blame the world for it. I read it as a teenager, and identified strongly with him and his attitude to the world; what's perhaps more surprising is that I still do.

I think _Catcher in the Rye_ is also very valuable as a work of vernacular fiction - although Salinger owed a great deal to Ring Lardner in that regard.


----------



## Bloggsworth (Dec 5, 2012)

Read it over 50 years ago, can't even remember what it is about... So, nope, it made no impression on me.


----------



## Lewdog (Dec 5, 2012)

"Catcher in the Rye" did effect me in a couple ways.  The book showed me the first bit of realism writing I had seen.  It was laced with everyday language including lots of cursing, which for a student of my age was kind of amusing.  The other reason this effected me, was it showed it is possible to write a great American novel early in a person's career without being a famous writer to begin with.  JD Salinger should be an inspiration to every writer on here.


----------

