What's the Big Deal: Praise & Criticism of The Catcher in the Rye
In his review "The Praises and Criticisms of J.D. Salinger's The Catcher in the Rye," Eric Lomazoff states "...The Catcher in the Rye will continue to be a point of great public and critical debate. One must remember, however, in the study and critique of the novel, particularly for a researcher or critic in 1996, that the story was written in a different time. If originally published today, the novel would probably create little publicity and garner only average book sales. The fact that a novel of such radical social opinion and observation was written in a time of conservatism in America made it all the more controversial. Some critics scolded the novel as being too pessimistic or obscene, too harsh for the society of the 1950's. Others, however, nominated Salinger himself as the top-flight "catcher in the rye" for that period in American history (Peterson 3). They argued that Salinger's concerns represented an entire generation of American youth, frustrated by the phoniness of the world, just like Holden was. The popularity of the novel and debate over its redeeming social value have never faltered since its initial publication, due in no large part to the fact that J.D. Salinger is now a recluse. It would be conclusive to say that critics of The Catcher in the Rye have legitimate criticisms of the novel, while advocates and supporters of the story's message also have expressed veritable praise."Read the following articles (3 sites linked below) to better understand the varying opinions of literary critics.
Biography:
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/01/29/books/29salinger.html?pagewanted=all
Analysis:
http://www.levity.com/corduroy/salinger1.htm
http://roomfordebate.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/01/29/reaching-holden-caulfields-grandchildren/?ref=books
Your Assignment:
1. Read the literary criticism and bio/eulogy (3 links above.)
2. Write an well developed paragraph (approximately 100 - 150 words.) Explain how your understanding of The Catcher... and/or Salinger has changed, positively or negatively, after reading the posted documents. Embed at least one quote in your discussion and refer (agree or disagree) with a comment made by one of your classmates.
*Please note, The first person to post does not need to refer to another classmate's response.
Enjoy,
Ms. O'Donnell
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteThroughout the readings that were necessary for this comment, I discovered numerous contradicting opinions among the critics. This is normal, however I feel that I now have a positive feel about the novel and about JD Salinger. The vibe that I gained was that Salinger attempted to display the problems and issues among teenagers in the 50s; the predicaments that adults and superiors overlooked. That also presents one of the main reasons why i feel that this book was banned. People did not want to come to this realization of what really went through a teenager's mind in this time period. Saying this, I completely agree with Elizabeth Wurtzel's comment of "They are medicated out of adolescence before they even have a chance to experience teenage angst, because their overprotective parents are desperately frightened of where all that friction might lead." Parents become frightened to allow their children to read this book because the saying "truth hurts" really becomes prominent. The parents do not want their children to see or have a feel of what teenagers who are supposedly "bad kids" do because it might twist their child's mindset and they won't be a "good kid" anymore. My overall feeling through this is that every child should read this novel because of it's powerful message of how teenager's really thought and did in the 1950s that parents never noticed or pretended not to. JD Salinger seems to mirror Holden Caufield's life, so this novel is somewhat autobiographical. Overall, JD Salinger was the one person who was brave enough and had the courage to bring these problems on the table, for all to view, and i greatly commend him for that.
ReplyDeleteI put together an opinion after reading the criticism and biography on The Catcher in the Rye and J. D. Salinger. Holden seems to be a mirror of Salinger. Thus, if critics are attacking Holden’s image; the critics are attacking Salinger’s identity as well (at least, in Salinger’s mind). More importantly, if Holden is Salinger, then Holden disappointingly never grows up to function well in the adult world. However, it must be hard for him to function well if people are constantly criticizing and betraying him. In my opinion, Salinger is not a very spectacular person, showing that it doesn’t take much to become a revolutionary, at times. He’s rather pitiable, actually, as he seems to not have known that the consequences for publishing such a book would’ve been so dire to his well-being. I also believe that the book isn’t anything special either. As Mark Bauerlein, an English professor and author, stated, “[Salinger’s] personal dramas don’t look unusual. [Teenagers] all have personal dramas, and they don’t need Holden Caulfield to express them.” However, in the days when this was published, Bauerlein’s statement was not true, which made this book rather incredible. As Kaelyn Huizenga said, "Parents become frightened to allow their children to read this book because the saying 'truth hurts' really becomes prominent." It seems that parents at the time formed certain values, and taught these to their kids. These kids grow up, and have feelings that contradict these values, and then suppress these feelings, lying to themselves. Salinger was one to openly break free of this “mold,” if you will, which caused him great pain, as expected of social deviation. So, I look forward to reading this first-of-its-kind book.
ReplyDeleteJ.D Salinger, a writer known for the drama and critisism caused by his books, more specifically "Catcher in the Rye". Salinger dared to bring up topics that no other author had the courage to discuss. Like Orville Prescott mentioned in The New York Times, "Rarely if ever in literary history has a handful of stories aroused so much discussion,controversy, praise, denunciation, mystification and interpretation.”
ReplyDeleteMy understanding of J.D Salinger has expand after reading the articles above, and just like Kimberly Swanson, i think "Holden seems to be a mirror of Salinger." Some of the thoughts that the character Holden seemed to have in the book, Salinger brought to life a couple of times. One example of this was when he moved to Cornish far away from civilization; in the book, Holden wanted to move to a cabin far away from those who he considered foolish. It could be that it was not Salinger's intent to make Holden represent him and his thoughts in any way, but Holden surely holds some of Salinger's traits.
As a closure, i would like to say that everyone who is has any knowledge about J.D Salinger or any of his books, will create an opinion or judgement no matter what. It was not Salinger's intent to cause such controversy, hence, he should not be judged for doing what he loved to do, write.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteI formed a positive opinion of J.D. Salinger’s book, Catcher in the Rye, after I considered the fact that he wrote a book in the 1950’s that people can still relate to today. An obituary for J.D. Salinger, written by Charles McGrath, notes, “The novel’s allure persists to this day, even if some of Holden’s preoccupations now seem a bit dated, and it continues to sell more than 250,000 copies a year in paperback.” While Kaelyn was discussing why the book was banned, she said, “The parents do not want their children to see or have a feel of what teenagers who are supposedly "bad kids" do because it might twist their child's mindset.” If the book can influence a child’s mindset, then they can still relate to Holden. If this book wasn’t still relevant to teens, then it wouldn’t have been banned so many times. Salinger succeeded in creating a character that people can still find themselves in even after 50 years, which made me form a positive opinion of him.
ReplyDeleteI completely agree with Kaelyn’s comment. If J.D. Salinger had not wrote this book on displaying the problems and issues among teenagers in the 50s then who would. I am happy that Salinger took a chance in writing this book because that is the only way people would have known why teenagers’ act the way they did. In the first website that Ms. O’Donnell posted Charles McGrath says that “J.D. Salinger turned his back on success and adulation, becoming the Garbo of letters, famous for not wanting to be famous.” I completely disagree with McGrath when he says that “J.D. Salinger turned his back on success.” I ask myself how is success measured? Writing about what the public wants to hear or writing about the truth? Salinger writes the complete truth about “understanding adolescence and its fierce if alienated sense of morality and distrust of the adult world.” I just like kaelyn commend Salinger for being brave enough to bring these problems out to the light where everyone could see them.
ReplyDeleteI would also like to share that this book would not have been a success if there weren’t people to talk bad about it. J.D. Salinger did a great job because many people have responded to the piece of literature in a positive and negative manner. For instance, Philip Roth wrote in 1974, “The response of college students to the work of J.D. Salinger indicates that he, more than anyone else, has not turned his back on the time but, instead, has managed to put his fingers on whatever struggle or significance is going on today between self and culture.” I now set a question to the commenter’s if J.D Salinger hadn’t exposed the truth of why teenager act the way they do then who would have? He was upfront with his writing and that’s what truly counts.
I like what Angela said, "...everyone who has any knowledge about J.D Salinger or any of his books, will create an opinion or judgement no matter what." I think that state is especially good for me because I had previously played Holden, not wanting to read the book, for a number of reasons. As I read about it however, I find I'm warming up to the idea. This however is more influenced by the description of Sallinger's writing style which sounds almost artistic. Now, as for the articles on him, I find myself angered by the descriptions of Joyce Maynard and Ms. Sallinger's writings on him. Now I have not met Mr. Sallinger or his daughter, but I have met Joyce Maynard, and was not impressed by her person, and don't think I would be by her writings either. In closing, I wish people could have been reverent of his reclusiveness, if he hides from fame, I feel he ought to be left alone.
ReplyDeleteAfter reading the articles provided I agree with Angela when she said said, “Salinger dared to bring up topics that no other author had the courage to discuss.” Salinger was without a doubt talking about topics foreign to the time period, but much like the book” Brave New World” some of the topics are not far off of what life is like today. As far as the opinions on the book, Catcher and The Rye seem to be personal. Not specifically based on a section of the book but a broader view of the book as a whole such as James Stern, a reviews for the New York Times. Stern said “His view on Catcher and The Rye is that it was too lengthy and being depressing beyond the needs of a reader. My question for Stern would be, Wouldn’t you want to have emotions connected to your reading? Having an emotionless story serves little purpose and a shallow understanding of what J.D Salinger was attempting to get his readers. Ultimately, Salinger in my opinion successes in creating a character that still tickles peoples personal experiences and there view on culture years later.
ReplyDeleteSincerely,
The Boss
J.D Salinger seemed to have had a very troubling life. In his early years he had a hard time trying to get his writing published. When the New Yorker finally agreed to publish "Slight Rebellion Off Madison" they postponed it for 5 years. J.D Salinger was then drafted into the army due to world war two. One benefit of his hardships was that he apparently "became a very different kind of writer."
ReplyDeleteJ.D Salinger never stopped writing and even wanted to be a famous writer,"But success, once it arrived, paled quickly for him." This was do to the excessive amount of criticism that comes with success. I agree with Kim, that when the critics attacked Holden’s character they were also attacking Salinger as well. The criticism and constant betrayal were simply to much for him. This pushed him to seclude himself from the world in an attempt to escape all the speculation and criticism. I however,don't really believe that seclusion was the best action to take when faced with all that adversity.
I agree with Kaelyn and Martha. Like Martha said," if J.D. Salinger had not wrote this book displaying the problems and issues among teenagers in the 50s then who would?" I think it's good that he wrote the book because now people today can see how much teens have changed and or in some ways stayed the same. As stated in the article The Praises and Criticisms of J.D. Salinger's The Catcher in the Rye by Eric Lomazoff, "Salinger's portrayal of Holden, which includes incidents of depression, nervous breakdown, impulsive spending, sexual exploration, vulgarity, and other erratic behavior, have all attributed to the controversial nature of the novel." With that said i can relate to this personally, because there was a point in my life where i was depressed and wanted to end my life, and i felt like no one understood what i was going through and i interpreted that to mean that they didn't care. After a few attempts and then going to counseling and therapy i realized that i'm not alone and that not necessarily my family and friends understood but there was other people/teenagers that did. So i am a little upset that the book was banned because it is not only good for teenagers but also adults. Adults sometimes forget what it was like to be a teenager and all the things we have to face on a day to day basis.I think this book would be good for adults to read because now they can be more aware of what their child might be going through, and now they can plan what approach to take to help their child solve their issues before it's too late.
ReplyDeleteI like Martha's comment. I also feel like the author changed for positive reasons. What I don't understand is why he wanted to go from being famous to being infamous. I do not know why he secluded himself from the world. Who wouldn't want to be famous for a book that everybody loves? I also agree with Ms. Kim Possible because it seems like holden represents Salinger through the text. So when the critics were analyzing his character and everything about him, they were also analyzing Salinger himself.Since most authors reveal a little bit of themselves through their text. I also agree with Lauren because the book was published a long time ago and it is still being discussed till this very day..I also agree with James when he says, "I wish people could have been reverent of his reclusiveness, if he hides from fame, I feel he ought to be left alone." No matter where he hides, he will always be famous, even though he doesn't want to be. Instead of leaving him alone, i feel like everybody is making his situation worse be talking about every sentence of his book, The Catcher in the Rye.
ReplyDeleteI agree with what most of my classmates had to say. Specifically, I agree with Angela when she says “everyone who has any knowledge about J.D. Salinger or any of his books will create an opinion or judgment no matter what. It was not Salinger’s intent to cause such controversy, hence, he should not be judged for doing what he loved to do, write.” I feel like everybody should be allowed to do what they love, without being harassed. My understanding of Salinger has changed positively because he was simply doing what he loved to do, until critics made him dread his own work. Charles McGrath, the author of the New York Times, says “Mr. Salinger turned him down, saying he had “borne all the exploitation and loss of privacy I can possibly bear in a single lifetime.”” In other words, Salinger was saying that he felt that everyone knew who he really was, because as Kaelyn said, he is a mirror of Holden.
ReplyDeleteI'm intrigued at how Salinger was able to portray the conflicts of teenagers in the 50's because adolescents in general can be complex and difficult to understand. I agree with Kaelyn's comment regarding parents not wanting their kids to read this novel because of the truth that unveils; parents fear that Holden poses as a bad example, but I think Holden can act as a character all teenagers can relate to and Salinger brings up conflicts nobody had the courage to mention beforehand. A teenager and a adult can lean multiple lessons from this book, and it disappoints me that this book was banned from various places. Overall, I applaud Salinger for creating such a controversial and well-written character/novel that continues to amaze people 50 years later. It saddens me that critics pushed this amazing writer to seclusion. I agree with Orville Prescott's statement of "If ever in literary history has a handful of stories aroused so much discussion, controversy, praise, denunciation, mystification and interpretation", since it basically sums up this novel. I look forward to reading Catcher in the Rye.
ReplyDeleteBecause I have not had any previous experience with Salinger's texts or the character of Holden himself, I was able to formulate a relatively unbiased opinion on both Salinger and his character. I strongly believe that Holden was, in fact, a literary manifestation of Salinger's teenage years. One would be hard pressed to support Salinger's refutation of this claim since both he, who "flunked out after two years and in 1934 was packed off to Valley Forge Military Academy, in Wayne, Pa.," and Holden, who suffered a similar fate and "was the manager of the school fencing team," just like Salinger." In my opinion, The Catcher in the Rye was supposed to be a novel about Salinger's early life experiences and his outlook on life, Salinger himself thinking that this point of view would be revolutionary and highly acclaimed by critics. Instead, much to his dismay, it was dissected by critics, producing a "vulgarity, lust, lies, temptations, recklessness, and cynic[al]" connotation with the book and with Salinger as a writer (Levity). Because of this, Salinger denied all accusations that Holden was, in fact, a version of himself and retreated into solitude. Nevertheless, the novel became famous, or, according to some people, infamous. I also agree with James in that the public's response was not appropriate. A person does not move to a secluded 90 acre estate to have college students and reporters constantly interview him and question his motives. His requests for privacy should have been honored. Like a wild animal, our interest may have scared a shy, reclusive personality even deeper into the shadows. I would, however, like to refute Lauren's claim that "If this book wasn’t still relevant to teens, then it wouldn’t have been banned so many times." I do not believe that "adults" have intentionally banned The Catcher in the Rye because teens who relate to the book could be driven to rebellion. No matter what the rebellious "goth" teenager or irresponsible 16 year old whose parents won't allow her to go to a concert believe, a large majority of those who have authority over us, colloquially known as adults or grown-ups, truly do have our best interests at heart. In reality, the simply wish to protect the childhood innocence that allows us to be free from the constant worry that plagues Holden.
ReplyDeleteAfter reading these articles and comments, I found that I agreed with many things that people were saying. Much like Kim, I think that Holden could be a reflection of Salinger, but much like Angela said, I don't believe that it was all intentional. Lauren said something that really stood out to me, "Salinger succeeded in creating a character that people can still find themselves in even after 50 years," because I feel that that is the basis of great literature. My view of this novel has changed positively now that I have a better understanding of the main character and how he relates to the author. I am inclined to disagree with something that Kim said, however. She referred to Catcher in the Rye saying that, “the book isn’t anything special, either,” which I would think false, because the book was banned due to its controversial content including “depression, nervous breakdown, impulsive spending, sexual exploration, vulgarity, and other erratic behavior,” according to “The Praises and Criticisms of J.D. Salinger’s The Catcher in the Rye” by Eric Lomazoff. I am intrigued to see where this novel takes us in our discussions and to see the evolution of our thought processes.
ReplyDeleteAfter reading the article, I agree with what most of my classmates have said. It seems as if most of the reviews for J.D Salinger are positive. Personally, from reading the biography of J.D. Salinger, I would like to begin the novel first before judging if Salinger was anything like Holden. Its difficult to agree with any of the critics without having knowledge of the book yourself. Like Morgan, I also disagree with Kim when she said, "the book isn't anything special either". The book might not have a big significance now, but consider the timeline that it was written it. In the 1950's, things such as " incidents of depression, nervous breakdown, impulsive spending, sexual exploration, vulgarity, and other erratic behavior" (Eric Lomazoff)were all considered to be contriversial. I feel that if a novel had such content during that time, that not only was made controversial but also impacted many teenagers, the the book is something special.
ReplyDeleteA part that impacted me as I read these articles, was how J.D. Salinger secluded himself from the rest of the world. He didn't trust anyone. Not even teenagers. In "J.D. Salinger, Literary recluse, dies at 91" it says, "he befriended some local teenagers and allowed one of them to interview him for what he assumed would be an article on the high school page of a local paper, The Claremont Daily Eagle"(Charles McGrath). That lead him to build a six-foot fence around his property; which showed how Salinger had insecurities of his own. In my opinion, I think an event must've happened to J.D as a teenager, that brought him closer to them. But, since the "betrayal" happened, it probably gave him a negative flash-back to that event.
I completely agree with most of my classmates; it really does seem as though Holden is a mirror, or as I see it a projection, of J.D. Salinger. The writing style used in the book alone keyed me in a little that the story could be describing Salinger's teenage years, however, it wasn't truly confirmed for me until I read these articles and had the opportunity to take a look at my peers' points of view. Like Evannise mentioned, Salinger eventually was forced to build a 6-foot fence around his property. It is obvious that the cause of this action was Salinger's disconnection from the outside world, and his insecurities about privacy and secrecy. I feel as though I now have a better understanding of both Salinger and Holden because of this interpretation; it has given me a more positive view of both of them, as well as the book as a whole. I see Salinger as a person who was trying to reach out to the rest of the world and create awareness of how teenagers truly acted in the 1950's, without leaving the privacy of his own home.
ReplyDeleteFurthermore, I feel that Holden is similar to him in the way that he, too, wants everyone around him to understand him. However, he doesn't really know how to reach out to people in the right way; Salinger's way of doing this was through writing a book with a strong message - strong enough that it is criticized by people of all ages, and has been for decades.
ReplyDelete