Is it worth it?

I think every teenage girl should read this, just to give them an idea of what their up against with their male counterparts for the next few years, and hopefully offer some explanation if nothing else.
The book is pretty good if you read it as a mature adult, but not as an edgy teen.

This
Remember as you're reading OP, catcher was written by a man in his thirties

>This book was so rapey
What does that even mean? The book only had one almost rape scene from what I remember. Stop applying things to books that don't exist.

It's short enough to read in a day, and at the very least you'll be able to talk about it with your friend.

It's a book so well written and so human that you'll loathe the main character for being a whiny fuck...exactly like most teenagers.

I love when teens rage about how whiny he is, as if they aren't the same if the wi-fi goes out or whatever

Enlighten us then, senpai. What is the point?

In the time spent shitposting about it here, you could already be halfway done with it.

...

The same basically goes for the entirety of Veeky Forums, though. You could read instead of browsing Veeky Forums, but the whole point of the fucking board is to discuss literature.

It had it's moments, but on the whole I didn't like it.

Holden raped Phoebe though, so it's not my kind of book.

Hit or miss for most people, but I liked it. I re-read it every few years and it's a different experience every time.

I can't stand angsty teenage characters, but not Holden. The book's well-written enough that he's just too human to hate, really, even if by most standards, he's loathsome.

It gives you a very good look on how teenage angst works. Paired with the Bell Jar it is a wonderful instruction manual on how teenagers act and is a wonderful reality check.

Good threads aren't "should I read this book?", especially when it's as easy a read as this. What discussion is there to be had if you haven't read the book?

>implying good threads exist on this god-forsaken hell of a site

They certainly do, you just have to be discerning in the ones you read. You sound like you want something edgier though, so /r/books might be more your speed.

This book is about PTSD and how no one understands it.
Irony.

HOLDEN WAS AN UNLIKABLE CHARACTER BUT I THINK THAT WAS INTENTIONAL SO THE BOOK WAS STILL CONSIDERED GOOD BY ME

Salinger was a fucking expert. He never put a word out of place. Read t and let it land.

bumperino

That girl is more patrician than you, my friend.

I find, even when this book is suppose to be the diary of an angsty teen, that the language is still excellent. I really think Salinger was a damn good writer

He gets the perspective dead-on from the beginning when Holden forgoes talking about "all that David Copperfield kind of crap." From the first paragraph, you're aware that Holden is sort of disdainful of the cultural establishment, just by one graceful Dickens namedrop. A master.

I could not relate with Holden in the slightest.

Having been a teenager I do not understand anybody who claims this tells you about teenagers and how they act.

The only people who hate it are 'They made me read this in school UGH' types

I'm still unsure of this being a kind of universal expression of teen angst. Holden is distinctly an outcast among peers and adults who have already adjusted to a 'phony' world. So isn't it more of an angst flavor for those that were a bit of a sentimental outcast kind of teen?
Like when we read this in high school most students didn't care and thought he was kind of a weirdo (including my teacher) and only a few kids related to him in any way.

I think it's less about angst and more about isolation, which breeds angst.

>Holden raped Phoebe though, so it's not my kind of book.

Nigga what

But most teens integrated. Holden seems to be a kind of loner archetype among his peers, and so more relatable to the minority who fit it.

THANKS FOR YOUR OPINION

The big thing is that he feels apart from everyone. His classmates, his parents, even his siblings. I don't think he's a 'loner' - I don't think there is such a thing as a 'loner,' truly. He just doesn't feel validated by any of his surroundings, which is something I think every adolescent person was intimately familiar with at one point or another.

This book gets more interesting when you learn that Salinger fought in some of the worst battles of WWII and had a thing for young, teenaged girls.

PTSD + Lolita complex = The Catcher in the Rye

>Catcher is a book for teens about teen angst.

Just stop.

Salinger was pynchon before pynchon if you're judging by how much he hid away from the public.

Listen here you little bitch I never said that, I just said I hated it

>had a thing for young, teenaged girls.

who honestly doesnt if you're completely t b h with yourselves phamiglia

how young we talkin'?

I guess that's right. Holden just seemed to have a specific kind of neuroticism to me, and I was thinking of someone like Stradlater who doesn't worry or think the way he does, who is already in lieu and doesn't mind, even though at some point he may have felt invalidated. Maybe I'm just projecting but I always felt the book was more about the socially worse-off and stunted teens.

Even so 99% of the book's critique boils down to "Holden is whiny".
And instead of having a more productive conversation we get petulant discussions on teen angst.

15 is like the lowest i feel like

...

The big difference between Holden and Stradlater is definitely neurotypicality moreso than sociality. Holden is definitely antisocial, behaviorally, but it's all an extension of his psyche. Likewise for Stradlater.

And I also kind of see Stradlater as a reboot of Steerforth, from David Copperfield. In that story, the contrast is that David is an orphan and Steerforth was sort of made to belong in the world, which is rather the same dynamic. Both characters are pretty much just used for contrast.

>antisocial
you don't know what that word means

Or you're being deliberately obtuse over a moot point.

That's my point though. Isn't the book more relatable to those who were outcast types couldn't deal with the world the way most did? That it's not necessarily universal for all teen experiences?

It's less than 200 pages of easy reading. You can read it in one, two evenings and form your own opinion about it.

That said, I liked it, but I think it's kind of dated. This kind of teenage disillusion thing has been more 'fresh' back when The Catcher was originally written - by now it' has been done to death.

basically tbqh

Yeah, it's a good book and an interesting character study

In the sense of, the closer you are to Holden and the farther from Stradlater, the more likely you would be to relate. It's definitely not universal, and I think it's still more of a very specific psychodrama created by Salinger than like an attempt at any kind of social realism, but plenty of the feels are accessible to most readers. Probably moreso to isolated/antisocial/'loner' types, but I don't know. Maybe people who get on really well in the world find some comfort in it for different reasons?