Howdy,
I'm going to hold off on giving my opinions about The Catcher in the Rye. Maybe I'll jump in at some point and throw my (red hunting) hat in the ring. For now, though, I'd like you to choose one of the following questions and write a substantive response. Remember the point here: write freely, engage your classmates, answer the question in an interesting, creative manner. Don't worry: nobody will shout out, "Digression!"
Choose one:
1) Do you think of The Catcher in the Rye as more cautionary tale or more something else?
2) Holden as a transcendentalist: react.
3) Why do you think the novel has generated so much controversy over the years? What accounts for this? What nerve did it or does it touch?
Have fun and all.
:)
I would say that Holden is a transcendentalist (I’m responding to question 2 by the way) because of the way that he views the world and the way he wishes it was. Holden strays from the norm, acts on impulse, and doesn’t really care what others think of him. The red hunting hat is a prime example of his individuality. His hatred of phoniness is a direct parallel to Thoreau’s “realometer”, and he considers several times to go live by himself in a cabin, to cut himself off from human contact. Like the transcendentalists, he shudders at the notion of working at a job where he has to deal with fake or boring people, who are more interested in making money than having an “intelligent conversation”. One of the biggest points of similarity between Holden and the Romantics is his belief in the innocence of childhood. He sees himself as their protector, especially Phoebe’s, and he spends a great deal of effort, such as erasing the F.U.’s, buying Phoebe the record, and taking her to the carousal, to slow down their progression to adulthood. He sees children as perfect, like the transcendentalists.
ReplyDeleteFirst, I would like to say that Nils is pure muff. In response to the third question, the book touches on the crazy, unpredictable and touchy side of growing up. Most people will point out the obvious learning experiences and trial and error of one's journey to adulthood, but Catcher deals with the raw emotion and volatile nature of adolescence. The rebellion contained in the book is nothing new. As David mentions, the red hunting cap represents his individuality. But people could handle that stretch. The raw thought and almost entirely dark frame of mind create an unbelievably sinister attitude from a young kid. The time period helps account for this fact because people in the years after WWII were still "old-school" and stuck in the past. Salinger paves the way for the dawn of this "psychoanalysis" he speaks of. The general public saw that the minds of the emerging generation could, if negatively influenced, turn into the minds of the criminally insane. The thought process that allows the reader to understand Holden so fully, also exposes the fringes of insanity in his young, evolving mind. The public could not handle this fact and, ironically enough, wanted to, like Holden, keep the children pure. (As David points out)
ReplyDeleteI am going to respond to the third question about the controversies surrounding The Catcher in the Rye. The obvious answer is because of the reactions to the language Holden uses, his blatant sexuality and sexual drives, and the promotion of lying, drinking, and rebellion. But the controversies run deeper than that, like Patrick pointed out. The protagonist rebels against anything established, tradition, or conformist (transcendentalist!). He disrespects all authority by not caring about his school work, running away, and hiding from his parents. He is a horrible role model as this book is about his downward, self inflicted spiral. This topics are particular sensitive to parents who believe their children could never be like that, but in the reality feel and act more like Holden than they think. They felt like they needed to protect their children from those ideas and feelings when they have those feelings anyway.
ReplyDeleteBut there also a historical analysis that can be applied, like Patrick started to do. During WWII, the youth of America helped in the war effort by making quilts, volunteering, and everyday sacrifices. But after the war during the 50s, when rock and roll emerged, the America’s youth became more rebellious with their blasphemous rock songs about taboo topics and underground dance clubs. The parents and adults tried to quell any rebellions or anything that could generate an act of defiance, and The Catcher in the Rye was a book that the adults targeted. They foolishly thought that if they could rid the schools of the books and music that promoted disobedience, then the youth would go back to being submissive. But this as failed as the banning of The Catcher in the Rye just made it more popular. (I do love irony)
The computer thinks I am unknown again- Stephen Armstrong. I think that the beginning of Ciaran's argument is valid. I am sure that one of the reasons this book brought some controversies is its harsh language and sexual content but there are many books that contain much more graphic material than this. There must be deeper reasons this book carries so much stigma. I think that this book puts people on edge because of its overall tone. Salinger has a way of pointing out many of the flaws in life that people see and choose to ignore. This is done with a realistic and for the most part sincere tone that makes people question their own world. Additionally, this book also does not present school in a very kind light. Many people do not enjoy school, if I may quote one of my favorite Who lyrics, "I’ve got my clipboard, textbooks, lead me to the station, ya I’m off to the civil war", but Holden takes this to another level. He comes right out and states his dislike for not just his school but also his teachers. This is best shown in a quote from page 13, "You don't have to think too hard when you talk to a teacher". One can see why people may not have wanted young people to think this way. This brings to the real reason for the stigma that surrounds this book. Certain adults have a massive interest in controlling what the younger generation thinks. This has become a constant and accepted fact in our society. And now it starts earlier than ever. Last year I was talking to my brother’s kindergarten buddy and he said that when he grew up he wanted to go down to Mexico to build houses for people. Are you kidding me?? When I was in kindergarten I wanted to drive a Texaco truck. There is no way a kid of that age would come up with that. I am sure somebody, in an effort to be cute, shoved that down his throat and he was nowhere old enough to realize he was being used for his parents to say oh look how sweet my kid is. I think Ciaran tried to elude to this, but without as much success as she could have had. I am not sure what rebellious rock and roll she is referring to that came out in the 50s. I think that she may be mixing up her decades because most of the music I have listened from the 50s is full of sappy lyrics about broken hearts and such. I’m sure there were some really keen “underground dance clubs” playing some really edgy rockabilly, but I am not sure how prominent they were.
ReplyDeletePatrick, Ciaran and Stephen perfectly summed up the uncomfortable topics and controversial ideas in the novel and touched on most of controversy inspiring characteristics. In addition, Salinger’s writing technique enhanced the book’s controversial effect because instead of simply narrating Holden’s actions from the outside, Salinger forces the reader to see the world from Holden’s point of view. Reading the story through the troubled protagonist’s thoughts not only incites sympathy for Holden but makes the story less of a cautionary tale because the author cannot comment on his protagonists shortcomings. Salinger’s novel also bred irrational disgust from protective mothers because of the very possible occurrences of this novel. Unlike other novels that have the same controversial themes in stories that are unlikely to happen to a typical family, parents were unable to distance themselves from Holden’s tale because it happened to an average boy with parents who cared enough to eventually get help for him.
ReplyDeleteI agree with David in that Holden in a transcendentalist. The only small difference is that transcendentalism was slightly more nature based. Besides that, Holden is full on transcendentalist. He despises society, he considers himself to be one of a very select group of individuals who understand how corrupt and false society is. He hates most people because he believes most people to conform to societal standards. Many times holden considers pulling a Thoreau and simply shutting himself off from society completely. Such as when he describes his plan to become deaf and mute. Transcendentalist's attempted to regain the ability to see the world how it was, without being influenced by societal ideas or any ideas at all. Much like young children. Just as transcendentalist see this as the purest way to look at life, Holden see's children as the purest form of life. He also recognizes that children see the world how it is intended to be seen, and wishes to protect them. So although Holden would probably hate to be put into a group, i would consider him a transcendentalist.
ReplyDeleteI'm a little tired so I'm not really in the mood to read over everyone else's responses, so I'm gonna respond to the third question and work in a connection to someone else somewhere down the road. Certainly, a lot of the controversy surrounding this book come from the edgy (for the time period at least) content and language. Between Holden's cursing, his cynicism, and the themes of sexuality and rebellion, there is a lot in this book that would knock a 1950's housewife off her feet. That being said, I think a lot of the controversy over the book is of a different nature and origin. On its most basic level, I think one of the main reasons that this book has become so popular and controversial, is that so many people find eerie similarities between themselves and Holden. On the surface, it's easy to say "Oh no, I'm nothing like him, I would never behave that way." Although that may be true, I think a lot of what Holden says and does can really ring bells on the inside of a lot of people; I know it did for me. There is no doubt that Holden is a deeply disturbed individual, but that doesn't mean that his words and actions aren't relatable. In truth, most of the people that Holden calls "phonies" are, in fact, phonies. However, I think most people look at Holden and they see someone that they either can't see themselves relating to, or someone that they should feel guilty about relating to. This, I think, it where a lot of the controversy about this book comes from. As many people as there are that see Holden as a despicable person, there are many others who can relate to him, and still more who might be deeply inspired by his struggles. I think that deep down, parents and other authority figures know that what Holden thinks and feels are the same emotions that many kids have to deal with growing up. They are nervous that kids might look to Holden's struggles for help with their own issues, and they are even more nervous that the kids will find it. Now, I'm saying that Holden is some great role model hidden in disguise... I'm merely suggesting that perhaps he is more relatable than a lot of parents would like him to be.
ReplyDeleteBy the way, I just saw Kevin's post, and I would like to agree with that last part about parents not being able to distance themselves from the story. It was well reasoned and well argued. There. I responded to some else's post. You're welcome.
ReplyDeleteIn response to the second question, I agree with david that Holden is a transcendentalist because although he calls everyone phonies, he is the one who only exists in concept and not necessarily in reality. He views the world with a fine comb and gives specific descriptions of everything going on. Regardless of all that, he certainly is his own person and has no care in the world to what anyone has to say about him. The reason he cuts himself off from others so much and doesn't have any very close friends is because he always seems to find the fake in someone, no matter what it is. The only thing that pulls me away from believing he is a full on transcendentalist is the fact that when he speaks everything is literal and doesn't really concern nature. When he thinks, it's always the realistic choice not constantly involving the life of nature. I highly agree with david when he says holden sees children as perfect just like the transcendentalist, because holden just believes childhood is so pure. The kids are so innocent causing them to be perfect little angels and thats how he treats Phoebe. So when Phoebe tries to act older, he doesn't take it so well because he want's her to remain an innocent angel forever. Holden criticizes everything with a sharp wit, if Phoebe was to grow up phony, Holden would most likely have a hard attack. In all, Holden is definitely a transcendentalist with a watchful eye of reality versus phony.
ReplyDeleteConnection: I agree with Madison and Hank on Holden's connection to a transcedentalism inspired lifestyle.
ReplyDeleteTotally unrelated...Response to question 1: While J.D. Salinger's novel can certainly be interpreted as a cautionary tale, I do not believe that was it's sole purpose. As to his ulterior motivations for writing such a story, they escape me at present. Though I am relieved in the knowledge that one of my astute classmates or our instructor will be sure to name them at one point in the future.
As a cautionary tale, the author's language and tone do an impressive (albeit occasionally obnoxious) job of influencing the reader's negative perspective of Holden's life. The constant labeling of people as phony and the repetitive use of particular words inspire overall distaste and pity for a person who "doesn't like anything", as Phoebe so eloquently points out. Allie's untimely demise and his consequent reaction with the windows in the garage and loss of consciousness, are one of many examples from the text demonstrating what some would call an "out-of-control" teenager. He is at the mercy of his emotions and the walls that he has put up between himself and the world going on around him. Yet, time and time again he tries to reconnect through those walls and is unable to, whether it's over drinks in a lounge, in a theatre, from a phone booth, or with a whiny prostitute. Holden's desperate misguided attempts (emphasis: attempts meaning few successes) to act more mature through alcohol, aliases, and women give further evidence to the fact that Holden is lost. He even wishes at one point that the truck driver responsible for transporting the ducks would take him away to another point in his life. Even at the conclusion of the book, he is able to indirectly admit that he needs help, for which the reader is grateful.
To start off my fiery comment. I am going with the flow of the current in that I agree with David and Natalie. I agree that Holden was a transcendentalist, because every time he got drunk or upset he would retreat to nature. When he got himself "silly drunk" Holden went straight to the park. When Holden first started off his adventure he was going to go straight to the park. To see his duck(ies)!! I would place Holden and Thoureau side by side with each other, because they both speak in the same tone about the world. For Thoureau it was the angered mad tone towards the people that go with the flow of the current but for Holden he talked in Thoureau's disapproving hermit voice towards the phonies of his world. (Old Spencer, etc) I would also consider Holden a transcendentalist because of how Holden disagreed with the reality, hotshots and phonies that surrounds him.
ReplyDeleteOn another note I wouldn't really say that Holden "despises" society because I think Holden just despises the fake people in life. He doesn't despise Pheobe, Allie, or Ackley, or the turtle-neck guy fro example. I think its more of that Holden is afraid of growing up, and becoming a phony so he has to be picky and pick out every bad and try to convince himself that he won't turn into that phony or hotshot. Unlike Thoureau who despises society totally so he confined himself in a forest, in a shack with only a fly as his friend.
Responding to the first quest I would say that the novel itself is not a cautionary tale, but more of a documentary of an estranged person. Nowhere in the novel does it try to tell you to not be like Holden or that doing as he did was explicably wrong, but told the story of Holden's life before treatment. Holden as a person would be classified as having some mental condition, I am not certain as to which as I am not qualified to make such a deduction. The story shows the readers through the eyes of a teenager that doesn't quite know what he's doing in this world, and shows the damage that one can inflict on himself by shunning out the rest of the world. It is in no way a cautionary tale because there is nothing to bring attention to, you cannot try to avoid mental illness because it is out of the reach of modern medicine. Some may interpret it to be a cautionary tale by inferring that the moral was to institutionalize all possible mental health patients, but that would be quite a stretch. The story is a fictional documentary of a fictional character in a possible setting, not a cautionary tale about insane people.
ReplyDeleteThe Catcher in the Rye is a controversial book that follows the path of a troubled teen facing adulthood. To me, it is seen as a cautionary tale as to what can happen to a teenager who is struggling to begin the scary thing called adulthood. Even though the transition doesn't happen this intense to everyone, it can happen to some. Just like when Holden's teacher told him to delve into literature for stories of people just like him, Catcher in the Rye can be the literature that people like Holden go to. It can be the tale that can be used to give people that also feel like the world is a really bad place with no good, a chance to see that somebody else like them, survived.
ReplyDelete2nd part:
ReplyDeleteIn response to Kevin...
Seeing the book through the protaginist's eyes sometimes does entice sympathy,but I don't think that was the purpose of the book. I think the purpose was to write a cautionary tale that would warn people like Holden of the possible dangers of living with negativity surrounding everything a person does and (what i stated above^^^).
Well...late again. Darn! Oh well, here goes. Matt definitely hit the nail on the head when it comes to how I see this book. The controversy that revolves around it comes from the dark, cynical, and otherwise 'disturbed' mind of Holden. He hates almost everything he comes in contact with and, in more then one instance, contemplates suicide or talks of death. It's not necessarily a 'feel good' piece of literature. Now, of course, there are tons of books dealing with complicated issues, but this book is different because it comes from a perspective of a teenage boy. That's what frightens adults, the fact that their teenage son absolutely can relate to this story. Therin lies the controversy. In order to not repeat what has already been said, I will leave it at that and not jump into any of the heated arguments that have already transpired. =)
ReplyDeleteFirst i need to respond to Patricks, patty you are the purest of muffs. In response to the third question, I think the controversy stems from Holden's rebellious actions. When parents read this story they imagine their child leaving school and running away to live their own life. Like Evan said, the thought that a parent's teenage son can relate to the story is what frightens them. I also want to disagree with Evan when he says that Holden hates almost everything he comes in contact with. I don't think Holden really hated anyone, in fact he even tries to connect with them and in multiple instances claims he enjoys their presence.
ReplyDelete