9 votes

Are today’s young readers turning on The Catcher in the Rye?

2 comments

  1. helbonikster
    Link
    When I read this at 17, admittedly I was young, white, and male, but what I related to on a deep and profound level wasn’t his affluent surroundings, it was his feelings. The emotions so...

    Though young people today are more carefully watched, they’re also looking out at the adult world and seeing very clearly that it has gone absolutely mad. How can one get all worked up about some “phony” classmate or a brother who sold out to Hollywood (is selling out even a thing any more?) when earlier that morning you did an active shooter drill in homeroom?

    Electric Literature gave this explanation of The Catcher in the Rye’s datedness: “If you’re a white, relatively affluent, permanently grouchy young man with no real problems at all, it’s extraordinarily relatable. The problem comes when you’re not. Where’s The Catcher in the Rye for the majority of readers who are too non-young, non-white, and non-male to be able to stand listening to Holden Caulfield feel sorry for himself?”

    When I read this at 17, admittedly I was young, white, and male, but what I related to on a deep and profound level wasn’t his affluent surroundings, it was his feelings. The emotions so eloquently expressed by J.D. Salinger through Holden Caulfield, felt like he had plucked them directly from my mind, which brings me to:

    I’m closer now to 40 than to 17. I no longer read to find friends in literature – I read for the writing. So when I recently read the book for the fourth time, I saw something brand new and I think closer to what Salinger intended: a perfectly written portrait of an imperfect character. Every syllable sings. Much of what I saw in this fourth reading, I had completely missed before.

    Which puts Catcher in a bit of a Catch-22. Kids who are reading to fall in love with a book no longer relate to Holden, and adult readers who appreciate the craftsmanship are too old to be struck by it emotionally.

    So, here’s my proposal to readers coming to The Catcher in the Rye for the first time now: read it as early as possible in your life. Read it alongside Ralph Ellison, Sylvia Plath, James Baldwin, Junot Díaz, Toni Morrison, André Aciman and Chimamanda Ngozi Adichie. Hate it if you must. Rail against Holden. Call him a spoiled brat. When it comes to all the money and opportunity he squanders, he is! Let 20 years pass. Let the world wash over you, then read it again. You might see Holden for who he really is. Not a stand-in for every single teenager that ever walked the Earth, but a lonely individual who finds the injustices of the world intolerable.

    1 vote
  2. Akir
    Link
    I may be in the minority here, but when I read The Catcher in the Rye as a teenager I thought it was hilarious. Sure, I could understand Holden, but I didn't really see myself in him like the...

    I may be in the minority here, but when I read The Catcher in the Rye as a teenager I thought it was hilarious. Sure, I could understand Holden, but I didn't really see myself in him like the author seems to have at that age. Rather, I saw my classmates doing the same stupid teenager stuff. I enjoyed the book not because it reflected my life, but because it reflected what I thought my life should have been if I wasn't living with my shitty emotionally abusive parents.

    But at the same time, I understand why my peers didn't enjoy the book as much. They were living in a post-911 world, full of paranoia and helicopter parents. While seeing Holden fumble with his sexuality with the prostitute was hilarious to a gay teenager who had already learned to be self-assured in his sexuality, I can see my peers irritated that this character could even get enough freedom to find a prostitute, let alone talk to one.

    1 vote