JD Salinger dies.

RIP, always sad to lose an author and one of international renown.

Read it (Catcher in the Rye) once when I was thirteen and didn't really think much of it.
 
Gaidin109 said:
GCSE is about its level. Read it again in a few years and you will see how superficial it can seem.
Click to expand...

Yes, GCSE is its level for a brief overview into the entire book but you can re-read it and analyse it a much higher level. I've read it twice whilst at University and keep discovering new things in it which in turn gives me a greater insight into the vast number of themes both in the book and in life.

It's a fascinating and unique read. Quite concise too - you don't need to study it, just put it beside your toilet and dip in as and when (I await the criticism about it only being fit for toilet paper!)
 
Ahleckz said:
Yes, GCSE is its level for a brief overview into the entire book but you can re-read it and analyse it a much higher level. I've read it twice whilst at University and keep discovering new things in it which in turn gives me a greater insight into the vast number of themes both in the book and in life.

It's a fascinating and unique read. Quite concise too - you don't need to study it, just put it beside your toilet and dip in as and when (I await the criticism about it only being fit for toilet paper!)
Click to expand...

I have read it a few times, its enjoyable, but I dont think it lives up to its hype. But like most things this is an opinion and opinions differ.
 
It's not much in terms of story lines, but it doesn't need to be

Also the main point of the book is the mentality of Holden Caulfield, and I agree with him on loads of things, and not so much on others. Also, it's written bloody well
 
It's a pity to lose an author of reknown as said but 91 is a pretty fair innings by most metrics.

I'm however another on in the camp of it being overrated, it's not a bad book but I don't feel it supports the level of acclaim it has, in this regard it is similar to Catch 22.
 
I read Catcher in the Rye a few years ago and thought nothing of it. Maybe I missed something. Will read it again soon. Its just a book after all.
 
Read it years ago and was not impressed at all.
I think maybe it just hasn't aged well. Maybe very edgy in the early '50s but I thought it was crap.
Let's break all the social barriers, I thought Clockwork Orange was a pile of poo too.

EDIT: Psychomania was great though. Shallow and great!
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom