Talk about going back in time! I remember reading this in school over 50 years ago...and what memories it brings back. Good stuff...I feel like a kid again!

After J.D. Salinger died, my 92-year-old mother expressed interest in reading The Catcher in the Rye, so I ordered a used copy of the book The Catcher in the Rye through Amazon.com and had it sent to her. She really enjoyed reading it and gave a review of it at her retirement home book club. She told them she loved the book. I asked for her comments for this book review, and she said:
"I was curious because I heard that after J.D. Salinger died the book is deemed a classic. I hadn't read it because at one time it was banned. I learned a lot about Holden Caulfield--coming of age. I laughed a lot when reading great descriptions of characters. I could gloss over swear words. A fun book open- ended."

We never received this item but have been charged for it. The expected delivery date has come and gone by one week now and still no book. Issue full credit for this purchase and we will get it from a more reliable source.

Although I did not necessarily like the ending, the rest of the book was very well written. It kept me reading way past the time I should have stopped each time I picked it up. It's easy reading and not particularly a long story. Enjoyed it very much.

As of today I have not completed this book. So far I have been very disappointed. It is not for children to read as it is so vulgar it disgust me. I am no prude but it seems no sentence is complete with out repeated curse words. Louise

Thanks for the quick delivery and the quality was BETTER than it eluded to on the description! Thanks so much! RIP JD.

I read this first when I was 17 and was assigned it in high school, and again just now when I am 53. This truly is a great book. But it should not be assigned to kids to read in high school. The assumption is that because it is about a teenager they will somehow empathize with Holden Caufield, and so be introduced to great literature. But I don't think that kids that age have the level of self-awareness necessary to appreciate what Holden is going through. It's the kind of thing you have to look back on to get. Certainly that is the experience of Holden himself. He has no appreciation of the events that are transforming him and only a dim understanding that he might be receiving useful advice along the way. So I expect it is the same with many of the kids who are forced to read this in high school. Wait until you are well past the experience, and I think you will appreciate this book a lot more.

I had to read this book in high school. Oh my, it was so scandalous back then. I wanted a copy after the author passed away and reread the book 40 years after the first time. How our morals have changed. Still an awesome book. R.I.P. J.D.

Teenager Holden Caulfield has just been expelled from yet another prep school for failing his classes and having a really bad attitude. Here he recounts his adventures and observations during a weekend on his own in New York City.

I remember being quite shocked at Holden's anti-social thoughts and non-stop profanity and not liking him at all when I first read this book. It was a pleasure to reread it forty years later and find that my feelings for him had changed a lot; now I find him a bright, charming, and pitiable combination of the social misfit from "Napoleon Dynamite," the angry young man from "Rebel Without a Cause," and a bit of Eddie Haskell, too. His penchant for vulgarity and manic emotionality remind me of a scared puppy who's all bark and no bite; he's in desperate need of attention and affection and luckily, he gets it.

This classic character study of a troubled boy is highly recommended for mature readers.

Let's start with the fact that this book is an American Classic. It deals with the coming of age of Holden Caulfied, a completely incoragable young man who is not always likeable. That's the thing that sucks you in. This kid swears, smokes, lies, gets kicked out of school, etc. etc. Not exactly the kind of book I want my teenager reading, but in the end, the story all comes together.
***Possible Spoilers***
Holden is quite intuitive and really sees the underbelly of human nature and the false bravado with which adults live their lives. He, of course, is full of false bravado himself (the scene with the hooker shows that). He calls them like he sees them, even at the expense of others.
Is Holden a hero to teens or a rebel without a cause? The answer lies in your own interpretation of this story. Give it a try.

Teenager Holden Caulfield has just been expelled from yet another prep school for failing his classes and having a really bad attitude. This story describes his adventures and observations as he spends a weekend on his own in New York City.

I remember being quite shocked at Holden's anti-social thoughts and non-stop profanity and not liking him at all when I first read this book. It was a pleasure to reread it forty years later and find that my feelings for him had changed a lot; now I find him a bright, charming, and pitiable combination of the social misfit from "Napoleon Dynamite" and the angry young man from "Rebel Without a Cause." His penchant for vulgarity and manic exaggeration is like a scared puppy who's all bark and no bite; he's in desperate need of attention and affection.

This classic character study of a troubled boy is highly recommended for mature readers.

I didn't much care for the book if I could pinpoint one thing I had a problem with it has to be the fact that Holden Caulfield is a jerk and a somewhat comical figure really who deserved everything that happened to him.

This in and of itself does not make the book a bad book the annoying part is that this is one of those books that attracts a really snobbish fan base think Atlas Shrugged, Brave New World or Lord of the Flies only if you can believe it Catcher in the Rye fans make Aynn Rand fans look sane. To those people I say reading a book that someone else wrote and having a strong opinion about it does not in and of itself make you an intellectual. If Catcher in the Rye was you're introduction to the world of literature I can respect that but there are better books to read once you have finished this one Catcher in the Rye is not the end of the road.

This has to be by far the WORST book I ever read! I'm sorry I wasted my money and time on it.

I just finished reading Catcher in the Rye and I did not care for it at all. Wanted to read it because of the publicity, but maybe because I am a grandmother, I just didn't like it. I just finished Dream Catcher by J. D. Salinger's daughter, a book I greatly enjoyed and think his daughter is a remarkable individual. However, the book seemed extremely juvenile to me. Most of the content was given to sex and I can see where young boys and perhaps girls would enjoy it. Not something I would have ever cared for but it had a lot of unnecessary profanity. It speaks to me of a young man who was mentally ill, I am sure that a label could be put on it today. I am not so sure it was not actually describing Salinger himself. After reading his daughter's book, I think Salinger definitely had mental illness, what I would call crazy. His family had to endure awful things because of him. He chose to be a recluse, and did not live in the real world, wanted to live in isolation.

what can you say about a book that delivers time after time. i get something very different from it now than when i was sixteen. it still matters, for a new set of reasons, and that's what makes it great.

Title: The Catcher in the Rye by J.D. Salinger

Pages: 214

Time spent on the "to read" shelf: 4 or 5 months I think.

Days spent reading it: 4 days.

Why I read it: The Catcher in the Rye is an American classic and very controversial. I honestly wanted to see what was so controversial. Also, it was one of those "classics" that I did not read while in high school. In researching about it later I read that in 1981 it was the most censored book in US high schools and the second most taught book in high schools. It was one of the 10 most challenged books in 2005, but it came off the list in 2006. Those are some fun facts for you.

Brief review:
This book frankly annoyed me. The writing has very repetitive and had many aggravating sayings in it. The word "really" is used almost as much as the curse words that are prevalent throughout the book (one reason it is often censored--I would guess that gd appears 2-3 times a page at minimum, sometimes significantly more). And I assure you, both appear more than they need to, I really mean it.

Holden Caulfield is the main character. He is the epitome of teenage angst. His world is utterly pessimistic. He sees only the bad in everything except his sister and his deceased younger brother. He is bright, but is failing out of school. He is obsessed with sex, but cannot develop a relationship with a girl. He is active and pursues all the pleasure trappings that a big city have, but has no defining meaning to his life.

The book covers three days between him being kicked out of school and his untimely return home. Holden is depressed, hates everyone, exaggerates EVERYTHING (annoyingly so), and seems to have few people skills. In short, he is the perfect anti-hero and irritating enough that I did not like him one bit while reading this book.

I suppose this book speaks to the hearts of some disaffected youth, but they would have to be interested in drudging through 200 pages of dribble in order to find the voice that Holden ultimately gives them.

I found little redeeming quality in this book. I felt like I was being attacked as a reader throughout the book. The curse words were prevalent. Holden's judgmental attitude and disquieting assessment that everyone was fake simply unnerved me. The last 20 pages or so bring a little clarity to the book, but even that is not satisfying. I read this article in wikipedia and found a little more clarity on the book, but not enough to ever allow me to suggest this to a friend. I understand why people have tried to censor it (and sympathize with them even if I disagree with them), but honestly if it was not so controversial I think few people would ever pick it up and think "Hey, that's a great book! Everyone should read this."

In short, I'm glad I am not Holden Caulfield. I respect those who relate to him and his story, but his life is from such a different perspective from mine that I never sympathized with the character and ultimately never connect to the book.

Oddly, in reflecting on the book some--the tone, the overall message, the anxiety it produced in me, perhaps I give J.D. Salinger too little credit. He probably got the exact response that he wanted out of me. I hate it when that happens. This is probably one of those books you mull over for a long time and never really like it, because its not fun. But you can respect it because of the emotions and conflict it produces in the reader. How interesting--actually reviewing the book in writing has changed my mind regarding my final critique of the book.

Favorite quote: "Girls. You never know what they are going to think."

Stars: 2 out of 5 (I originally was going to give it 1, but its moving up based on my reflections).

Final Word: Really?

i realise this book is of note given the time it was published and its stayle, however i think in todays age it is decidely average and ot worth reading unless you have a desire to get a perspective of what would have been revolutionary at the time of its publication.

Catcher in the Rye by J.D Salinger is a story that can make anyone smile. The main character, Holden Caulfied, is a troubled teen that is yet again, expelled from another haughty boarding school. Holden cannot find the motivation to succeed in school because he feels he does not have a purpose. Why apply yourself if you don't know your place in life? Holden struggles with his inner-self, battling his own mind, and trying to understand his purpose in life as a teenage boy. Holden's difficulty in comprehending his place in the world as a young boy is what makes this story unviversally relatable.

After Holden is asked to leave Pencey High School after winter break [expelled], Holden ditches school early to take a little "vacation" to New York City; he packs and leaves by train in the hopes of enjoying himself before returning home to his parent's wrath. In the few days he spends in New York , he experiences the city's nightlife through strippers, bars, and night clubs. In contrast, he also spends his free time by revisiting his childhood, reuniting himself with old friends and visiting sentimental places. Holden seems to have a lot of friends, although it is obvious he is not confident about friendships. Holden degradingly numbers off girls throughout the story and therefore his character becomes bothersome. However most of the time it is very easy to sympathize for Holden as he is in deep distress, and he feels that he is surrounded by a bunch of "phonies". No matter who he associates himself with, whether it is an old friend or a stripper, he feels out of place. The more Holden observes and aquaints himself with humankind in New York City, the more he realizes he is different, and the more he feel like he is without purpose. His inner-struggles and battling of the mind eventually peaks causing for a catchy ending. However, the author does not fill the ending with detail and it can be very frusterating.

Over all, this book was easy to relate to, it was funny, and it was happy and sad all at the same time. Salinger's writing is humorous...but it is not forced humor. He often incorporated spontaneous wit, humor that is not necessarily "obvious". For example, the laughter that come from dealing with an awkward roomate. The struggles that Holden Caulfield went through could be applied to anyone's life as a high school student, and being able to follow Holden through his journey of discovery makes this book relevant and dear to any reader's heart.

Compact discs available at half dot com, just type in "catcher in the rye , audio" and it comes right up. Great for the sight impaired or dyslectics.

In my opinion, the hype is all this book has. I have spent my life reading most of the classics, along with best sellers, biographies, etc. I stopped counting when I got to 10,000 books read, about 13 years ago, so I consider myself to be a book connoisseur. This Catcher in the Rye is one book I wish I never read. Actually I didn't even bother to finish it, because it is such a waste of paper and time. If you want to read a great coming of age book, read A Separate Peace or A Prayer for Owen Meany. If you want to read about a real hero, read The Real George Washington.

Like most people, I was required to read this book in the late 60s. I don't have any recollection of being touched by it at all. I read it again in college, and either I thought it was all about disaffection and rejecting middle class values or I was told that by my teachers.

I glanced at it again over my daughter's shoulder on a long plane ride a few years ago and couldn't wait for her to finish so I could read it again. I was shocked to see that I had completely missed the point: it's about Holden's vertiginous fall into depression after the death of his little brother. His parents and his sister are all too damaged by their own grief to help him, and he's struggling to feel something while avoiding feeling anything. These are familiar demons, beautifully evoked.

I just read the book, now I am 47 and this is what I got out of it: All the adults are not dealing with a troubled youth in a constructive way. I have read some of the reviews and I think they are giving Salenger way to much credit. This is a book where the adults are dumb and the only smart one is the kid sister. My guess is Salinger had a issue with authority figures all his life and let it all out in this book. I can say that I have read it so I can at least discuss it with others but I got no insite into my life from it and neither did Holden by the way. There is lots of cussing for no really good reason in the book. If you took all that out, the story would be the same but it would be much more readable to a larger audiance.

Holden has some real mental issues going but I don't think society is the cause as my guess Salinger would like us to think. I do think society will be shown as the cause if they ever make a movie or Holden will be shown as some misguided saint. Kind of reminds me of the teenage boy shooters that we have seen over the last few years. I wonder if any one of them have read this book?

Very quick shipment of Catcher in the Rye. I had it shipped to my brother for a birthday present and I can't wait for him to read it. The book was in excellent condition as well.

catcher, a prayer for owen meany and live like a fruit fly - my favs of all time!

Perhaps one of the best thing about this classic novel is that virtually anyone who reads this can relate to it somehow. This novel, that was published in 1951, reads like it was published last year. The themes included in these few days in the life of Holden Caulfield are very real, some of them being a bit taboo for today's society (not to mention the society of 1951). The Catcher in the Rye follows main character, Holden Caulfield, for a few days after failing out of his fourth high school. The sixteen year old is very rebellious, but has a kind nature. After a fight with his roommate, Holden opts to duck out of Pencey Prep a few days early. He decides to stay in a hotel until he thinks his parents have cooled down after receiving news he was being kicked out of another school. His antics over the next few days include a prostitute, a night club, an old girlfriend, and a visit to his baby sister at her elementary school. This is a coming of age story; after one has read it, it's obvious why this work by Salinger is considered a classic novel.

My high school teacher forced my English class to read this book back in the late 1970's but somehow I managed to avoid reading it - maybe I was visiting colleges or something at that time. In any case, about 6 years later I found myself alone and stranded in the Australian outback with absolutely nothing to do and nothing to read except a box of books that included most of the works by Mark Twain, John Steinbeck, Kurt Vonnegut and this one by Salinger. It was the first time in my life that I had ever delved into literature in any real way and I totally fell in love with Twain and Steinbeck and especially Vonnegut. But when it came to this Salinger thing, I couldn't believe how boring it was, how irrelevant it seemed, how utterly phony its angsty rebelliousness seemed to be. I had grown up around tough kids who lived difficult lives when I was a kid and in Australia I had been working with roughnecks in the oil business, so this Salinger thing seemed pathetically trivial to me and its fame remained totally baffling to me. So about 8 years after that, I thought maybe I had missed something on the first read, so I read it again. And then I tried to re-read it for a third time about 5 years after that, but the effect was always the same. You call this angst? You're telling me this is what rebellion feels like? I can only think that my English teacher and all those other teachers who think this is somehow profound really haven't had much of a life, haven't really plunged too far into the depths of human experience, haven't really had to face difficult questions about existence and so forth. I'm sorry, but it's just a boring book. And if you're a teenager and your teachers are cramming this down your throat and you don't get it no matter how hard you try, don't sweat it: you're not alone. Maybe this was mind-blowing stuff 60 years ago, but 25 years ago I thought it was just an over-hyped waste of time... and I still do. Maybe there's a reason Salinger went into hiding: so he wouldn't have to face his utter lack of anything worth putting into print.

A few days ago, I was reading the blog of Roger Simon, on the occasion of J.D. Salinger's passing. Simon was going to school at Dartmouth, near where Salinger lived in New Hampshire, and he really wanted to meet the writer. He managed to get as far as the great man's front door, before being turned away by a girlfriend. In response to the short blog entry, I noted that I've read many books, but never The Catcher in the Rye, for whatever reason. Every time someone tries to explain the book and why it resonated with them, I just get annoyed. It makes me want to read the book less.

So I commented on Roger's blog article, and joked that I'd probably prefer a Pastrami in the Rye to The Catcher in the Rye. I have a thing for Langer's. Anyway, Roger then wondered if anyone had read Catcher recently, or wanted to now having not read it in the past. A few days later I when I was out and about, I idly went to a used bookstore, discovered they were out, went to a second one ditto, and wound up buying one of the few copies left at the local Borders. It's been a couple of days, and now I've read the thing. It wasn't at all what I expected, and I didn't relate to Holden at all...but I still think it's a brilliant book, just not for the reasons that everyone else (or those I've read, anyway) seem to think it's great.

For those of you familiar with music, Randy Newman is probably best known for the song "Short People." It's about prejudice and how stupid prejudiced people are. Newman famously has gotten sick of various lunkheads yelling "Hey Randy, short people suck!" at him randomly on the street. He deliberately chose a characteristic that would be beyond prejudice, even semi-intelligent prejudice, and found that people were much more stupid than he thought, and that the song, as a result, resonated with a lot of people it wasn't supposed to.

With The Catcher in the Rye, I get the same impression. I don't think this was supposed to resonate with anyone. If I understand it correctly, the book was written for adults, and only after a good long while was it assigned to children. It resonates with teenagers in many ways, because a lot of kids when they're that age feel aimless and alienated. The problem with taking the book literally is that *no one* at least as far as I'm concerned was ever as alienated as Holden Caulfield. It's as if Salinger wanted to exaggerate the unattractive qualities of this kid, with the intention of making a main character so objectionable that no one could like him or take his story seriously, and everyone would get the message that this sort of alienated behavior is beyond the pale. No wonder the guy exiled himself for 50 years. No one understood his book...either that, or I misread it completely.

So, for those of you who haven't read the book, this is a synopsis of the plot, though it's mostly a synopsis of the main character because there is no plot. Our hero, or anti-hero really, is Holden Caulfield. He comes from a well-to-do family (at one point he mentions his father's a corporate lawyer, they have an apartment that's half of a floor in a building next to Central Park, he has a grandmother who sends him lots of money for his birthday, etc.) and he's just been kicked out of his third prep school. He left one (because everyone there was a phony; one of his bugaboos is he hates phonies) and was kicked out of the other. This one is called Pencey, and Holden has been kicked out because he just ditched most of the classes and did none of the homework. So he goes back to New York City for the weekend, and just aimlessly horses around for the whole book. At the beginning, when he's telling you what is going to happen, he says he'll tell you about the "madman" weekend he had. You get the feeling that the character's supposed to have written this account as therapy, to try and sort out why he did what he did.

The weekend itself is unremarkable, except for Holden making an ass of himself repeatedly. He goes to various bars and restaurants and tries to order liquor, which he shouldn't be served because of his age. If he gets it he gets drunk and sits there getting annoyed with the people around him in the bar, and silly things about them that irritate him. If they don't serve him alcohol he does the same thing, only he doesn't get drunk doing it. Holden's hyper-critical about everything around him, and spends pages telling you about how he can't stand phonies (almost everyone he mentions in the book is a phony in some respect) and he hates *things*. One of the more annoying (and recognizable) traits of Holden-the-teenager is that he is constantly trying to convince you he's an old hand at things. He repeatedly refers to "when I was a kid" and is always telling you that he "always" does something in such-and-such a circumstance, as if he's been doing this or that for decades. He's the sort of teenager who earnestly tells adults he's very mature...and of course isn't mature at all.

So why did I give this novel five stars? It's brilliantly written. The author adopts Holden's voice and uses it as his own--never breaks character no matter what--for 214 pages. You believe that this little self-important self-absorbed twit is actually writing this book, telling you about what an ass he was during this weekend. I'd always thought that this book was to be taken as the classic coming of age story, but of course Holden doesn't come of age during the course of the book, at all. At most, he gets a little sense smacked into him (figuratively) when he announces to his little sister that he's running away, and she decides to come with him. Holden instead is shipped out to Hollywood, where his older brother D.B. is a screenwriter (who Holden predictably thinks sold out). D.B. keeps watch on him, while he's here in California. Holden the narrator isn't clear about what's going on, but it sounds like his parents sent him to some sort of sanitarium or something, perhaps to help him get his head straight, and he's written this account while there.

I guess what I'm trying to say is this: The Catcher in the Rye is about how screwed up and alienated a kid can be, except the author exaggerated the characteristics past all reality to make his point more forcefully. To my mind, the book is sort of a cautionary tale. If you spend your whole teenage years criticizing everyone and everything around you, you could wind up like this. It's not a pretty picture, though at times the book is very funny.

I have to say then that I'm appalled that this book is taught in high schools as if it's somehow something that teenagers *should* relate to. They shouldn't relate to it, and no one should aspire to he like Holden Caulfield in the least. This book should be read by adults, those who have gotten far enough along in life that they can safely look back at their adolescence and realize what a jerk they were being when they did various things that seemed important at the time. *Then* you might get something out of it, and you'll certainly get a laugh or three.

I bought this book just a week or so before Salinger died. I finished the book I was reading a few days after his passing and decided to finally read this alleged masterpiece -- and masterpiece it is, indeed. I wish I would have read it when I was 17, but alas, I waited until age 31. Nevertheless, I remember what it was like to be 17, and honestly, I related to the character Holden Caulfield a lot today; even as a married father and professional "phony." I can only imagine how utterly groundbreaking this book must have been when it was first published in 1951.

What I loved about the book: I could say "everything," because I did, but I'll give a few specifics. First, I loved the voice in which it was written. Holden is sarcastic, snotty, and just way too cool for almost everything -- just like I was when I was 17. I loved the exaggerations and hyperbole. I identified with his descent into near-madness, being in that awkward stage between childhood and adulthood, not knowing what to do, not really understanding or not wanting to deal with the consequences of your actions, really just not being ready to grow up. As Holden wanders New York in a sleep-deprived stupor, he explores these issues within his mind; he jumps from one feeling to another, and breaks down and cries more than once. It truly is a powerful novel, and one of the three best I've ever read. Five stars all the way.

The book is just 214 pages and a breeze to read. If you haven't read it, you should. I've been reading a lot of "classic" novels lately and this is the first one that I know for a fact I will be reading again in the future. I could see myself reading this every couple of years for the rest of my life -- it was that good.

There is nothing that I can add that hasn't already been said about this book. But it was an important book to me in my teen years. Feeling lost, this book made me feel as if someone out there understood me. And for that I will forever be grateful to JD Salinger. May he dance with angels.

I graduated from Hi School in 1950. There are no words to describe how regimented the world was at that time. There were no rebels as models that was before James Dean & Elvis. The sterotypical girl were supposed to resemble Doris Day and the male be as stoic and jock like as possible to be accepted in that world so long ago. The movies were our role models very few had T.V. and T.V. was impossibly stupid in 1950. Even if we were unaware of our behavior we were attempting to emulate what we had seen on the screen. If you didnt fit the "Keep up with the Jones"
mentality you were an outcast. The phoniness and the superficiality of this decade is what makes "CATCHER IN THE RYE" so relevant today. I had heard about this book for years, never read it until my later years. This book is a monumental work of art that todays teenager can identify with even more so than in 1951 when the book was published.

Probably because of how stupid it is. It's been years since I read it, but I can sum it up for you. It follows the experiences of a spoiled rotten dumbass rich kid with no drive, no motivation, no goals, no self respect. Why? Because he's never worked a day in his life and expects the world to feel sorry for him because he has teenage angst. This kid could be considered the orginal emo without the make up. Yeah he shows signs of schitzophreina, but that really doesn't make him more compelling or pitful. Bottom line, this is the saga of a self centered little bastard incapable of feeling any emotion for anyone save perhaps his little sister. It's not timeless, the story teaches nothing, but creates a model of an idiot. I'll say this though, if you are a parent and you're kid turns out like this kid, you have failed as a parent. Mabye that's the point of the book, but I doubt it.

The book is overhyped by the hippie crowd because they can relate to the character. As in they're spoiled rotten rich little idiots who have never worked a day in their life and are looking for hand outs. That's the description of the main character and the synopisis of the book. This is probably why the book has been banned so much, because it's an insipid self centered, apathetic mockery of the human experience. A guide to living for the weak minded so called elite masses.

My oldest son was surprised to hear that J.D. Salinger fought in World War II. He thinks of Holden Caulfield as a contemporary, a peer, anachronistically making his way through a few days of life. The period references in the novel are like props on a movie set, no more real than the phonies Holden encounters. It's perplexing that so many of my son's classmates felt no connection to Holden after reading The Catcher in the Rye this past year. We are told on TV, on the internet and in movies that our teenagers and young adults are increasingly savvy, mature and perceptive. When it comes to technology, they certainly are. But most of students in the class considered Holden a whiny freak without realizing that often, it's the whiny freaks who walk through life with the clarity of sight and earnestness needed to leave this existence a little better than it was when we entered it. The story itself is a masterpiece. Salinger was firing on all cylinders and tapping into the strange other-worldly literary omnipotence we usually attribute to Shakespeare when he wrote Catcher. It's interesting to wonder whether he was even aware of everything he was doing in the book or if he was like a pro athelete who enters "the zone" and emerges at the end of the game a puzzled hero. Every time one of Holden's apologists dies, as his creator did this past week, a piece of Holden dies with them. Fortunately, he is as viral as one of my son's favorite You Tube videos. When we follow his exploits, Holden's DNA intertwines with our own and is propagated in everything we say and do. Fortunately, he will never completely die, but will continue to confound those who think him merely a whiny freak. RIP Holden Caulfield. Only Shot At A Good Tombstone

Just think: 91 year old, J. D. will live on in teenage land forever! God Bless him for creating such a marvelous read.
I love this book because I can read it once a decade since I first encountered it in high school so many years
ago and like it just the same. Holden is forever lively, silly, young and engaging--and it still makes me
shake my head when I remind myself that the story takes place in the late 1940's. Goes to show you things
really do not change--especially, the sporadic emotions of teens. But I need to say while Salinger's little
novel is engaging, it is limited. I can understand why people are questioning its immense popularity.
Holden's journey is just a "slice of life" and not a full story that merits classic fiction.

So I haven't read this book in about 10 years. I just randomly decided that I want to start reading again to help add some imagery and metaphors into my song writing - believe me, reading does this. So literally 5 minutes ago, I did a google search for this book, and the first thing that pops up is that JD Salinger died yesterday, the article was created at right about the same time I was thinking of getting this book again. Fate? I dunno???

Catcher in the Rye is quite simply an American classic. Its approach is unintentionally timeless, as Holden, and those he encounters, are as believable as characters come. I'm amazed that even in this digital age, college students can so easily relate to Holden's situation and the angst he feels towards the world. Everyone goes through it, and that is why so many people (of all ages) love this book.

Like (probably) most folks who read this book, it was jammed down my throat as Required! Reading! in my Honors English class in High School (I guess they saved it for the Honors class because we were all Ivy-bound brilliants who wouldn't be seduced into the gutter by all the naughty language and behavior depicted in the book).

Why?

Since when was rebellion for its own sake considered radical in the literary sense?

Reading this book was like getting stuck on the last commuter bus home next to a drunken, rambling teenager.

Its style may have been "radical" for its time, but it's neither interesting nor particularly well-written. I have no idea why this is considered a "classic."

To me, an example of a "classic" is something like Frank Herbert's "Dune"--even though it was written back in the 60's, before the lunar landing, it still remains an epic story in and of itself, even with the science fiction aspects removed. "Catcher" on the other hand is more of a period piece, and makes for boring reading, like most of the Bronte sisters' works which we were also required to slog through (oooh, Edwardian social mores, and written by a WOMAN! How RADICAL and RELEVANT!! not....).

In short, this book for me sums up everything that's wrong with the way that English-language literature is taught in school. No, we shouldn't let kids read the funnies and the White Pages and call it literacy, but there has been enough new stuff in the past 40 years to push out some of the no-longer relevant stuff.

For all of those of us who were influenced by JD Saliger's capture of the spirit of adolesence in the 1950s, for those of us who truly commited to reading after devouring the pages of CATCHER IN THE RYE many times over, this is a sad day. The guru of adolescents - then and since then and now - is gone. Adding to the aura of genius as a writer is the aura of mystery that surrounded the greater part of his life: will we ever know the etiology of his silence? With his death we can only hope that the manuscripts that were never published in his lifetime will beign to appear and be available to public evaluation and consumption. Until that time, we can only offer appreciation to a very influential writer of our times. Grady Harp, January 10

"The Catcher in the Rye" is one of the most poignant coming-of-age novels ever written, and Holden Caulfield is one of the most amusing narrators in American literature. However, he's also one of the most annoying. When I first read "Catcher" several years ago, I was in awe of how Salinger created an almost-real human being out of imagination, ink, and paper; a few years later, when I tried to read it again, I couldn't get past chapter 4. Either I had matured, or Holden hadn't, or maybe a little bit of both; but the main reason I've never been able to re-read "Catcher" is because of Holden's adolescent whiny-ness, which wears thin after the first few chapters. I wholeheartedly recommend reading "The Catcher in the Rye" -- it is, without a doubt, a literary landmark -- but I would qualify my recommendation with this reservation: It's not the end-all be-all of American literature. Read it, enjoy it -- and then move on to bigger and better things.

I am writing this entry after just receiving notice that the author of this book, J.D. Salinger, has just passed away at 91. I am living proof, although I am sure no alone on this account , that the teenage angst that preppie Holden Caulfield, the narrator of "Catcher In The Rye", was caught up in his immediate post-World War II generation was contagious all the way down at the bottom of society to housing project kids like me later on. Needless to say this high school assigned-reading was one of those books that I devoured at one sitting, if I recall correctly. But here is a better perspective on the book. Some books you read once and move on. Others you read, re-read and live out, including on a trip to New York a stay at the old Taft Hotel. How is that for having a more than a literary effect on the reader. Only Jack Kerouac's "On The Road" had more. So long, J.D.

I just learned that J.D Salinger has died.

American literature has lost one of its most influential and everlasting voices.

RIP

I love the theme and concept of the story and what Salinger is trying to convey. It is interesting an engaging. On the other hand I hate Holden Caulfield. He is terribly annoying and mean spirited. I understand how he fits well into the construct of the story but I know if I met someone like that in real life I would punch him in the face. He is so unlikable that I cringe whenever Holden speaks. If I could relate to him in any way I would have liked him more, but I do not.

I always heard that this book was a classic and must be read, blah, blah, blah. Well, I finally did and its all that and more. I'm actually upset that I didn't read this in high school because Holden Caufield reminds me of myself at that age. Salinger's voice of a the teenage main charcater is so on point its really amazing. Every college freshmen, especially males, should be made to read this. Classic!

Let me start by saying that I can see why a lot of people wouldn't like this book, especially a lot of people who have to read it for school. To many people, it seems like the typical "teenage angst" kind of book, and it's very easy to think that the whole way through the book. If you learn nothing from this book then you didn't get the meaning behind it - it's a blunt statement, either you agree or you don't. And if you *do* get the meaning behind it, but found it to be boring or repetitive anyway, then that is your opinion. Some people just simply don't like the same books.

I have to admit, when I first started reading Catcher in the Rye I was a bit struck at why it was considered a classic in literature. With me, I started seeing something deeper when I got to the middle of the book. It isn't until you start seeing the same things being repeated that you start to notice. The title of my review is a great example. Holden Caulfield is a prime example of questioning youth. Most teenagers aren't focused on morals, nor do many of them think deeply about what goes on in the world. And the few that do are like Holden; they're confused, lonely, and scared as hell. So the more I read and the deeper I delved into the meanings behind Holden's thoughts and ideas, the more I began to understand. Holden Caulfield isn't just the average 16-year old. He is, yet he isn't. He *thinks* deeper than the average teenager. He's still immature in a lot of his thinking throughout the book but overall his character is just this mass of confusion. He seems confused at a lot of things, at why a lot of people are the way they are, yet he himself isn't perfect. That is what shapes his character. He isn't flawless, and the author, Salinger, clearly brings that out to the reader. Sometimes Holden contradicts himself - a flaw within himself that is telling the readers that he is human. By developing his character in this way, I saw it as a way to make you both like and dislike him. If you liked him too much, you'd have sympathy for him, but if you disliked him enough too, it evens out to where you really just don't feel bad for him. Rather, you're just following along with him. If I felt any kind of sympathy for Holden throughout the book it was when he tried to talk about things but no one seemed to understand where he was coming from, or what he was talking about. With Holden, what he said didn't have to understand. He just wanted to talk. And he never really felt like he was listened to. This is evident every single time he gives a waiter or waitress a message for a musician playing - "People never give your message to anybody". Holden not only is insecure about people not delivering his messages, he *knows* that people won't deliver them. And that is why I feel like Holden repeats a lot of sentences in the book. I feel like the author wanted Holden to keep repeating things, even when he was going "I mean.." because Holden never felt like anyone listened to him to begin with. If he doesn't think waiters or any of the people he talked with listened to him then why would he think his readers would listen to?

One of the things that I noticed, that really brought out an important issue for today, is how neglected Holden seemed to be. The whole time you're reading the book, it's easily clear to see that Holden just wants someone to talk to. The first example was with Ackley, and then with Stradlater, the woman on the subway, to Faith Cavendish, to the three women at the hotel, to cab drivers, to the prostitute, to the nuns, to Sally, to Luce, to his sister Phoebe, and to Mr. Antolini. And the only time that Holden ever felt that anyone was listening to him was when he talked with Antolini. The way that I took it, by the time he had finally gotten to Antolini, he was so burned out and tired from everything - drinking, poor rest, getting sick - but I also felt that he was finally give out mentally too. It's obvious that Holden was tired of the life that is "expected" of humans, of adults, and wanted to find his own way, but people kept pointing out how important things like school really were. When you're a teenager you feel that way, and when others don't listen to you or try to understand, the whole world comes crashing down on you. I can understand why some readers would say that Holden is just another "whiny, rich kid" but even "wealthy" people can have a hard time, mentally. The thing is, BECAUSE he such a well off kid helps this story flow. Because it isn't told from a poor person's point of view, or someone who is considered dumb. It's told from a teenager's point of view that, though he may be well off, is still struggling with the same exact problems that we all face sometime in our life. With Holden, he experienced it when he was young, and that's why this story is so important to society. Because many teenagers still continue to feel this way, and it's up to us to make them feel important and worth something. Another thing I noticed was that Holden is a very anxious person, and he is easily bothered by the smallest gesture if it is given by the same sex. This was the case with Mr. Antolini. Holden literally freaked out and left his house when he woke up to feeling his old teacher's hand on his head. I don't blame him for leaving either, but this tells us something about Holden's character. That he really is "yellow" and that he is quite anxious when it comes to people rubbing him the wrong way.

What I walked away from this book thinking was this: As humans, we seem to be in such a hurry for everything. That we focus so much on media and entertainment and trying to impress others, that we miss the bigger picture, and that's life. We forget that there are others who need help, others that just want to talk, to not be lonely, how Holden was, how a lot of people are. The great thing about this story, is everyone can come away with a slightly different interpretation. For me, it's about direction, it's about finding yourself. It's about helping others, it's about a cry for attention. I think Holden said it best in my favorite part of the book, when he was telling his sister Phoebe about what he wanted to do in life - "I keep picturing all these little kids playing some game in this big field of rye and all..and I'm standing on the edge of some crazy cliff..I have to catch everybody if they start to go over the cliff..that's what I'd do all day..I'd just be the catcher in the rye..".

When I was in high school, and that was many years ago, I clearly remember our literature teacher having problems with classifying this book to any genre. We had to read it, and most of the classmates grumbled. Yet, most of the classmates were girls, I should mention, and they were infatuated with a book called `Cry, The beloved country'. So we were kind of divided, we, the boys, preferred Holden, even though we found him harsh to read, never to admit it, because we just did not want to discuss the book which the girls liked. Anyway, I still do not think that `The Catcher in the Rye' belongs to any kind of literature that deserves to be taught in high schools, because this book is disturbingly one of a kind. Nevertheless, after all these years I read it again, and I have discovered that it does have a genre, perhaps not an acceptable one, but it does belong to a certain category. I would put it under the category of `Revolutions'. At first the reader is kind of recoiled by the persistent complaints exclaimed by the hero. Today, I could compare it to a diary of any ordinary self absorbed profoundly disturbed Scandinavian urchin. But Holden, despite of being the most antagonizing protagonist I have ever read about, is not the seemingly anarchist type. Despite his anarchistic tendencies, Holden is a rebel with a dream; a vision even. Unlike the ordinary post traumatic stress disordered and self absorbed Scandinavian urchin one may confuse him with, Holden is actually dreaming about saving the world. The children that he wanted to catch and save from death in the rye field are the children of the future. Salinger, through Holden is the real dreamer; Aye, Salinger the author is clearly the real rebel, and it does not surprise me it was such a success in the sixties and seventies. The spirit of revolutions blew in the air then, and some of the warnings Holden talk about is of the dangers of becoming corrupt. I believe that if Salinger tried to publish this book today, it would have surely failed, because in my view the spirit of the age is so rotten that his warnings would be mocked today. Anyone who will try to change the world today will have to face the rotten masses Holden encountered with, or even worse. I must admit, this book is so controversial that it was intriguing to read it once again. I read it again because of a program I saw about John Lennon. The murderer of John Lennon claimed that this book had triggered him to commit his diabolical atrocious crime. He left this book in his hotel room to his investigators to read in order to understand why he murdered John Lennon. I couldn't help thinking about the poor investigators who had to read this obnoxious book just to try to figure out the line of thought of a psychopathic killer. I do not know how they would analyze it, but the way I see it, any man, sick and full of hate could pick up on the angry energies of Holden and blame it on the book. Holden's rage is aimed at everybody, the schools; the system of money; at the institutions, his older brother, his teachers, his school mates, basically the entire world is Holden's enemy. I can only guess that the murderer of John Lennon picked up on one of those surges of hate and used it as a pretext to commit his vile act. The loss of John Lennon made me wish this book was never published. I find it uncanny, or kind of ironically eerie in a way, because Holden's message is to save the world, he is the catcher in the rye, and John Lennon was on his side in that respect. John Lennon was the catcher in the rye; he did save many children from the dark spiritual world. John Lennon was a messenger of love and peace which he delivered through his wonderful music. Could it be that his killer deemed him as Holden's older brother, D.B? I do not think Salinger should feel guilty that his book has been abused by a psychopath, but I think Salinger failed in the creation of Holden. In my view he should have made him less jittery, and a bit more rational, or more balanced. I have no doubt in my mind that this book reflects in fact Salinger's own rebellion against the brutal corruption of mankind, particularly against the film industry which mutilates many works of literature. I agree with him that there is corruption in the film industry, and that mankind reached the bottom of the pit in regard to morals. Moreover I admire the fact that Salinger rebelled against the money system, and against fame, and chose to live in solitude. He declined offers to make money and he chose to live the life of a true artist; to live by the spirit as he disconnected himself from mankind which has already began to rot in the fifties. Salinger, in my view has won over the jungle law, and defeated the devil in the fact that he refused to become what Holden describes as a prostitute. He could have turned to one of those contemporary writers who made business out of art and betrayed the divine spirit of truth, but he resisted it and stayed faithful to his principles. Like a solid rock against the mainstream he stood. Moreover, I also sympathize with Holden, and like many, I understand his deep pain, and I feel sorry for him to feel the betrayal of mankind. In a way, I think Salinger is more of a holy messenger, or a disciple of morality, not in any religious way, but in a spiritual way. Yet, in fairness, I must say, he was not a good writer. Salinger, with all my admiration towards his revolution against corrupted mankind cannot be considered a good writer. His literature is rather pathetic. Indeed, he has the heart of a pure artist but he is not a worthy artist. His books `Franny and Zooey' and `Nine Stories' were simply worthless; it was like reading cartoons somewhat. I will not allow my judgment be clouded by his wonderful revolution against the corruption of mankind. Salinger is not a talented writer, I read his other stories, and I drew the conclusion that he cannot be compared with great classic writers such as Poe, Chekhov, or Dostoyevsky. In fact, Salinger could have been successful as a journalist or a politician had he pursued such occupations. As a rebel he could have made John Milton proud, but he is not a real literature writer. Salinger has the heart of a prophet or of a disciple, and that is admirable. I believe he succeeded in delivering a great message in this book, but I do not think that he is a great writer, or that this book is a concrete work of literature. It gets therefore only the average mark of three stars. This book is worth reading, but I do not recommend it to the fragile minds. Unless of course if you are into revolutions, or unless you admire people who are catchers in the rye.

While relevant for it's time, I find it to be one of the most over-hyped books ever. To be fair, I think this about all of his writing. So it goes.

I recently read the Catcher in the Rye, and I didn't think it was all that great. I found it a bit boring actually. I couldn't read the last 3 or 4 pages of chapter 25 because I got so tired of main characters whinning. It also seemed very likely that he had bipolar disorder.

The reason why I think I was able to keep reading the book up until the end is because I can kind of identify with Holden. Aside from that, Nothing.

It was basically a book where nothing happened and I was very disappointed with the way it ended.

I read this book after being told by a friend that I was similar to the Holden Caulfield character of the book. At that time I was struggling in high school and my parents were mad at me about my poor grades. This was the perfect book to read at that time.

The book is narrated by a young failing student in a boarding school who runs off, stays in a creepy hotel with a prostitution business, he gets drunk at a bar, roams the city, goes to a movie, and runs back to his parent's home. He has cool adventures and comments to the reader on his disenchantment with society. The book is a page turner. I couldn't put it down. I highly recommend it to anyone who was deemed intelligent by their parents but struggled in school.

Such a popular,famous or infamous little book depending on your view.Salinger's masterpiece and highly guarded work.A contributing factor in John Lennons'murder maybe,maybe not.Also associated with the Reagan assassination attempt.Why is this I wonder?"The best book ever written in the English language" quoted the salesgirl as I purchased it for my daughter for her high school reading assignment.She said it with such conviction,I think both of us were stunned.I said nothing,just smiled,you know, that smile that conveys "yeah,I know what you mean",too embarrassed to admit,"no kidding,never read it myself".Well read it I did,finally.A book I should have read decades ago. It wasn't required reading in my high school but I think I know why after reading it.It was a fun,fast read and kinda cool following Holden around.Seeing his anguish and disdain for those around him and the institutions he is forced to live within.Highly troubled yes,but you get the sense that he'll be OK in the end.His period of adjustment from a youth to a young man can be seen in his attitude,his choices and his need to be different.Love pangs,sexual urges,smoking,drinking all the rights of passage are explored through Holdens'eyes.It is kind of a warped,more psychiatric version of Ferris Beuller only a fifties version with less phone use,no texting,E-mails, computer use or outside influence from rappers,TV or other idiotic distractions teenagers are bombarded with today.Just pure emotional dilemma which must be resolved from within. I must say I enjoyed it very much,could not put it down for long with each chapter an adventure.What will Holden do now?How is this kid going to handle this one?etc.The sweet portrait it paints is probably wasted on todays youth whom I fear just won't get it.As a reader in my late forties,I could.Rediscovering 'Catcher In The Rye' was refreshing and diversionary. Just enough to take me away and escape to Manhattan for a few days.To be the companion of Holden Caulfield was fun and it will be for you too.Written in a clear,wonderful style as if Holden was talking to me, it is easy to see why this was so popular in its day and hopefully will continue to be read for decades to come by those who love good literature.

This book is very engaging. I had a hard time putting it down. I think many of us can relate or at least sympathize with Holden Caufield. At first whim the ending may seem lackadaisical but once you look back on the meaning of the book and its main character it makes more sense.

This book written more than half a century ago is an excellent example of what goes on in a young man's life as he searches for his psychological self in the mirror of society. He is caught in the sexual travesty of the time as he seeks something good in the midst of a misadventurous society and college life. Salinger's insight into the psychology of a boy-man is unique, and the cause of this book being required reading in schools. It remains high on the list of books even to this date.