OK, now I've read it. Yeah, I don't know how this is a surprise. I read Catcher 20 YEARS AGO as a young teen and thought it was stupid then. Maybe I ought to reread it and see if it has improved, but I will probably want to strangle ol' Holden.
I like how they turn it into the teenagers' fault--it's because kids today are too shallow and don't know how to ponder meaning and identity! Hey guys, maybe it's that the book is outdated and grating and whiny, and it isn't the timeless stand for truth you thought it was when you were 17. Smack Holden upside the head and give him a job at a construction site.
Connecting to Holden was slightly hard, but the one that was really, really hard was A Separate Peace. I was reading it in the 1980s and it was set in WW I or II. I think The Bean Trees has now been assigned which is cool as it's something that's set in the last decade.
I re-read A Separate Peace a few years back and really, really liked it -- but it almost killed me in high school.
I think the issue with Catcher isn't so much the emotion and psychology of it (as some of the people quoted in the article seem to suggest), but the wicked dated language. It's hard to take a guy seriously when you don't believe in him.
Indeed, yes, the language is very problematic. "You're all a goddamned bunch o' phonies" and others. Franny and Zooey I read and liked. But, he's also kinda schmucky.
Like, everytime I see SP at the bookstores for Summer Reading, I do the sign of the cross or say "Noooo!!" Maybe, I should re-read it at a later date, but am still slightly traumatized. Re-reading Lord Jim in college, which I also had to read for high school, helped me appreciate it. I think I do agree that there should be more choice in school summer reading.
That link takes me to a TypePad login page...
Posted by: dangermom | 22 June 2009 at 10:45 AM
Fixed the link, as well as the typo -- thanks, dangermom!
Posted by: Leila | 22 June 2009 at 10:57 AM
OK, now I've read it. Yeah, I don't know how this is a surprise. I read Catcher 20 YEARS AGO as a young teen and thought it was stupid then. Maybe I ought to reread it and see if it has improved, but I will probably want to strangle ol' Holden.
I like how they turn it into the teenagers' fault--it's because kids today are too shallow and don't know how to ponder meaning and identity! Hey guys, maybe it's that the book is outdated and grating and whiny, and it isn't the timeless stand for truth you thought it was when you were 17. Smack Holden upside the head and give him a job at a construction site.
Posted by: dangermom | 22 June 2009 at 12:31 PM
Connecting to Holden was slightly hard, but the one that was really, really hard was A Separate Peace. I was reading it in the 1980s and it was set in WW I or II. I think The Bean Trees has now been assigned which is cool as it's something that's set in the last decade.
Posted by: babs | 22 June 2009 at 10:15 PM
I re-read A Separate Peace a few years back and really, really liked it -- but it almost killed me in high school.
I think the issue with Catcher isn't so much the emotion and psychology of it (as some of the people quoted in the article seem to suggest), but the wicked dated language. It's hard to take a guy seriously when you don't believe in him.
Posted by: Leila | 23 June 2009 at 06:47 AM
Indeed, yes, the language is very problematic. "You're all a goddamned bunch o' phonies" and others. Franny and Zooey I read and liked. But, he's also kinda schmucky.
Like, everytime I see SP at the bookstores for Summer Reading, I do the sign of the cross or say "Noooo!!" Maybe, I should re-read it at a later date, but am still slightly traumatized. Re-reading Lord Jim in college, which I also had to read for high school, helped me appreciate it. I think I do agree that there should be more choice in school summer reading.
Posted by: barbara | 25 June 2009 at 07:20 AM