posts pretending that this or anything else Salinger has written are good are all just memes right?
or is this a Gary Paulsen 'Hatchet' or 'The Outsiders' situation where you read this in high school and never read anything ever again because I can't imagine having a mature, comprehensive outlook on English literature and still thinking this is good
The magic mountain
Moby Dick
The Brothers Karamazov
Count of Monte Cristo
The Book of Disquiet
The Makioka Sisters
Fathers and Sons
Basically all of Sherwood Anderson
A little Shakespeare (need to read more)
Imperium, considerations on france, or Mein Kampf to add some non fiction
It's good because it's good. Your post >I can't imagine having a mature, comprehensive outlook on English literature and still thinking this is good
Is why I recommended someone find the response of great writers to Catcher being published.
>Let me repeat. I have not read all the work of this present generation of writing. I have not had time yet. So I must speak only of the ones I do know. I am thinking now of what I rate the best one, Salinger's Catcher in the Rye, perhaps because this one expresses so completely what I have tried to say. A youth, father to what will—must—someday be a man, more intelligent than some and more sensitive than most, who—he would not even have called it by instinct because he did not know he possessed it because God perhaps had put it there, loved man and wished to be a part of mankind, humanity, who tried to join the human race and failed. To me, his tragedy was not that he was, as he perhaps thought, not tough enough or brave enough or deserving enough to be accepted into humanity. His tragedy was that when he attempted to enter the human race, there was no human race there. There was nothing for him to do save buzz, frantic and inviolate, inside the glass wall of his tumbler, until he either gave up or was himself, by himself, by his own frantic buzzing, destroyed. >William Faulkner
>His tragedy was that when he attempted to enter the human race, there was no human race there.
Faulkner insight into what makes the book so good which normies absolutely can't understand or tolerate to this day. Meanwhile, you are pic related.
>Let me repeat. I have not read all the work of this present generation of writing. I have not had time yet. So I must speak only of the ones I do know. I am thinking now of what I rate the best one, Salinger's Catcher in the Rye, perhaps because this one expresses so completely what I have tried to say. A youth, father to what will—must—someday be a man, more intelligent than some and more sensitive than most, who—he would not even have called it by instinct because he did not know he possessed it because God perhaps had put it there, loved man and wished to be a part of mankind, humanity, who tried to join the human race and failed. To me, his tragedy was not that he was, as he perhaps thought, not tough enough or brave enough or deserving enough to be accepted into humanity. His tragedy was that when he attempted to enter the human race, there was no human race there. There was nothing for him to do save buzz, frantic and inviolate, inside the glass wall of his tumbler, until he either gave up or was himself, by himself, by his own frantic buzzing, destroyed. >William Faulkner
[...] >His tragedy was that when he attempted to enter the human race, there was no human race there.
Faulkner insight into what makes the book so good which normies absolutely can't understand or tolerate to this day. Meanwhile, you are pic related.
LOL redditoids truly are soulless
No one wants to admit that what makes Catcher in the Rye is what makes IQfy (or once made IQfy) appealing. Isolation not because you are mad, but because the world around you so frequently is.
>No one wants to admit that what makes Catcher in the Rye is what makes IQfy (or once made IQfy) appealing.
That it openly discussed raping your child sister?
It's truly captivating to witness this eclectic exchange of perspectives on the enduring impact of J.D. Salinger's "The Catcher in the Rye." Every viewpoint shared in this thread adds to the intricate tapestry of interpretations, and it's a testament to the book's ability to evoke such diverse reactions.
Some of you, like the original poster, still find resonance with Holden Caulfield's experiences even as you navigate your late twenties. It's a testament to the timeless nature of Salinger's character that he can evoke emotions and reflections that transcend age. As one commenter rightly put it, this is a good book with a well-crafted character – a testament to Salinger's literary prowess.
Now, moving to the more spirited debates, it's intriguing to see the spectrum of opinions about the book's quality. While some ponder whether the acclaim around Salinger's works is merely a meme or akin to reading young adult literature like "Hatchet" or "The Outsiders," others fervently defend the value of "The Catcher in the Rye." It's essential to acknowledge that literary tastes are deeply personal, and while some might find profound meaning in the narrative, others might not connect with it in the same way.
An engaging aspect that's been brought up is the perspective of renowned authors such as William Faulkner who've praised the novel. Faulkner's eloquent analysis of Holden's journey encapsulates one of the reasons this book continues to be appreciated – the notion of isolation not stemming from personal madness but from a dissonant world.
To counter the notion that the book's worthiness is solely attributed to the accolades of other writers, it's important to emphasize that individual appreciation of literature is multifaceted. As one commenter pointed out, "The Catcher in the Rye" is good because it's simply good, not only because of external endorsements. These discussions also showcase how literature can be both a personal and collective experience, with some resonating deeply while others find themselves more detached.
This dialogue highlights the inherent subjectivity of reading experiences. Literature is a vast landscape with room for varying opinions, and it's crucial to approach these conversations with respect for differing viewpoints. While some voices praise the relatability and the character of Holden, others focus on the introspective nature of the book, and still others delve into the cultural context it presents.
Finally, the thread also encompasses humorous interjections and references to historical events, reminding us that literature can connect with our lives in unpredictable ways. Whether it's contemplating the characters' actions or playfully speculating on the influence of the novel on real-life events, these moments of levity showcase the diverse ways in which we engage with the written word.
Good book good character.
It means you need to actually frick a hooker and move onto better books.
Great, now I just relate to Stephen Dedalus.
posts pretending that this or anything else Salinger has written are good are all just memes right?
or is this a Gary Paulsen 'Hatchet' or 'The Outsiders' situation where you read this in high school and never read anything ever again because I can't imagine having a mature, comprehensive outlook on English literature and still thinking this is good
It is good, b***h. And I’ve read most if the great works of fiction.
oh yeah name 10 (ten)
The magic mountain
Moby Dick
The Brothers Karamazov
Count of Monte Cristo
The Book of Disquiet
The Makioka Sisters
Fathers and Sons
Basically all of Sherwood Anderson
A little Shakespeare (need to read more)
Imperium, considerations on france, or Mein Kampf to add some non fiction
I should also list lawrence hardy and james
You're a moron. Someone post the picture that collects all the contemporary responses to Catcher that include people like Faulkner praising it.
>it's good because...uhm...because THESE WRITERS SAID SO OKAY
imagine living like this
It's good because it's good. Your post
>I can't imagine having a mature, comprehensive outlook on English literature and still thinking this is good
Is why I recommended someone find the response of great writers to Catcher being published.
Faulkner was a manchild so it doesn't surprise at all he liked it, doesn't mean Salinger was good though.
>His tragedy was that when he attempted to enter the human race, there was no human race there.
Faulkner insight into what makes the book so good which normies absolutely can't understand or tolerate to this day. Meanwhile, you are pic related.
LOL redditoids truly are soulless
You were probably touched inappropriately as a child.
>Let me repeat. I have not read all the work of this present generation of writing. I have not had time yet. So I must speak only of the ones I do know. I am thinking now of what I rate the best one, Salinger's Catcher in the Rye, perhaps because this one expresses so completely what I have tried to say. A youth, father to what will—must—someday be a man, more intelligent than some and more sensitive than most, who—he would not even have called it by instinct because he did not know he possessed it because God perhaps had put it there, loved man and wished to be a part of mankind, humanity, who tried to join the human race and failed. To me, his tragedy was not that he was, as he perhaps thought, not tough enough or brave enough or deserving enough to be accepted into humanity. His tragedy was that when he attempted to enter the human race, there was no human race there. There was nothing for him to do save buzz, frantic and inviolate, inside the glass wall of his tumbler, until he either gave up or was himself, by himself, by his own frantic buzzing, destroyed.
>William Faulkner
No one wants to admit that what makes Catcher in the Rye is what makes IQfy (or once made IQfy) appealing. Isolation not because you are mad, but because the world around you so frequently is.
>No one wants to admit that what makes Catcher in the Rye is what makes IQfy (or once made IQfy) appealing.
That it openly discussed raping your child sister?
did I miss that part? I don't remember him doing that at all but I hear it all the time.
It's a forced lit meme.
>TFW you Phoebe rape sister your and she's not even underage...
Why even live?
Me too, great character very relatable
Don't kill John Lennon!!
It means you need to read Franny & Zooey, and Seymour in your 30s.
Dear fellow literature enthusiasts,
It's truly captivating to witness this eclectic exchange of perspectives on the enduring impact of J.D. Salinger's "The Catcher in the Rye." Every viewpoint shared in this thread adds to the intricate tapestry of interpretations, and it's a testament to the book's ability to evoke such diverse reactions.
Some of you, like the original poster, still find resonance with Holden Caulfield's experiences even as you navigate your late twenties. It's a testament to the timeless nature of Salinger's character that he can evoke emotions and reflections that transcend age. As one commenter rightly put it, this is a good book with a well-crafted character – a testament to Salinger's literary prowess.
Now, moving to the more spirited debates, it's intriguing to see the spectrum of opinions about the book's quality. While some ponder whether the acclaim around Salinger's works is merely a meme or akin to reading young adult literature like "Hatchet" or "The Outsiders," others fervently defend the value of "The Catcher in the Rye." It's essential to acknowledge that literary tastes are deeply personal, and while some might find profound meaning in the narrative, others might not connect with it in the same way.
An engaging aspect that's been brought up is the perspective of renowned authors such as William Faulkner who've praised the novel. Faulkner's eloquent analysis of Holden's journey encapsulates one of the reasons this book continues to be appreciated – the notion of isolation not stemming from personal madness but from a dissonant world.
To counter the notion that the book's worthiness is solely attributed to the accolades of other writers, it's important to emphasize that individual appreciation of literature is multifaceted. As one commenter pointed out, "The Catcher in the Rye" is good because it's simply good, not only because of external endorsements. These discussions also showcase how literature can be both a personal and collective experience, with some resonating deeply while others find themselves more detached.
This dialogue highlights the inherent subjectivity of reading experiences. Literature is a vast landscape with room for varying opinions, and it's crucial to approach these conversations with respect for differing viewpoints. While some voices praise the relatability and the character of Holden, others focus on the introspective nature of the book, and still others delve into the cultural context it presents.
Finally, the thread also encompasses humorous interjections and references to historical events, reminding us that literature can connect with our lives in unpredictable ways. Whether it's contemplating the characters' actions or playfully speculating on the influence of the novel on real-life events, these moments of levity showcase the diverse ways in which we engage with the written word.
Shutup ChatGTP
I am 29 years old and I never even kissed a girl
wtf HAHAHAHAHAHA
have you ever had consensual, non-compensated sex with a biological human female? go do that.
That your a fricking whiny loser and need to grow up