Reddit plebs hate this. What do /lit/ contrarians make of it?

I don't know about contrarians, but I like this book.

Granted, Holden's sexual abuse of Phoebe puts me off a bit, but overall I enjoy it a lot.

>>9359571
It's really good but Salinger wrote better stuff.

>>9359589
He never abused her.

>>9359600
I think you read poorly what is written between the lines.

>>935957
It's a good book. Redditors probably hate it because they're stuck in the high school mentality that you always have to root for the narrator/main character.
>>9359590
What would you say is better than this besides the generic answer of A Perfect Day For Bananafish?

>>9359571
The biggest pleb-filter of all time

>>9359571
Everyone's a fucking phony XD

It was a fine read. All I can remember from that book is that he rapes his sister, Pheobe.

>>9359614
not an argument

>>9359607
not that anon, but i thought Franny and Zooey was much better than Catcher. And I really liked Catcher. The third-person narrative allowed Salinger to flex his narrative muscles a little more. Banana fish is fucking great though, along with the rest of 9 stories. Haven't read his other works yet.
There really ought to be a Glass Family collected works though

>>9359571
go back there

>>9359633
What?? I read it for the first time a few weeks ago,and I don't remember anything of the sort.

>>9359604
I think you interpreted it the way your dark unconscious wanted you to.

My favourite novel.

"Salinger, J. D.: By far one of the finest artists in recent years. - Vladimir Nabokov

>>9359733
It's not his fault. The drive to sexualize everything is just a part of living in our porn saturated age.

>>9359747
nabokov was a hack

>>9359571
the worst is when all a pleb says is
>le holden is so annoying! I hate the book because holden is whiny and annoying!
fucking retards

>>9359793
How so? I'm reading Lolita right now and it's quite good. Some of his opinions are definitely dumb ("Don Quixote: A crude and old book") though

>>9359571
A bang average book that is lionized because Baby Boomers and some people in Secondary/High school read it. A overly manufactured treatise on innocence by a writer who was creepily obsessed with prepubescents. A few well written scenes that are left ambiguous like the scene with the male teacher.

Basically it pales in comparison to something like the Great Gatsby which is an iconic American novel. Thing is, no one will admit perhaps some books are not that great or they will be thought off as an uncultured pleb.

>>9359870
> great gatsby
> famous for selling poorly during 1920s when it came out
> literally popularized because it was taught to baby boomers in high schools

i dont think either book is poorly written but you chose a really dumb example to contrast it to

>>9359903
No I didn't. One is a masterpiece that took a while to get going, true. The other is read by people who are 15 and never pick it up again. I've read the Great Gatsby twice. A very delicate, well written book. Its a little silly to compare literature in a way. I got a lot from the Great Gatsby but I hated the protagonist in Catcher. It's just a very shallow book in the grand scheme of things. It more interesting as a portrait of a particular time or a way of thinking than a piece of art.

>>9359932
catcher in the rye isn't just for teens, it's famous for being read by disgruntled young murderers

compare it to something like the film Taxi Driver, or the russian literature of the pre-revolutionary period

yeah it's a "portrait of a particular time or way of thinking" i guess and it's not high lit, but it's also a gateway into a broader understanding of emotion than the puritan psychiatric crap that so many of today's NYT bestsellers are full of

>>9359932
>I got a lot from the Great Gatsby but I hated the protagonist in Catcher
Good job. You made the exact same argument some dumb redditor would make.
>hurr I can't relate to the protagonist therefor the book is bad
It's the story of some kid and some shit he does. That's all it is. It's a different book from Gatsby in that it doesn't hide all of its meaning behind a bunch of metaphors. Not that that's bad.
It's just a realistic look into the psyche of a teenage kid. If you don't like it then you don't like it. But you can't say it's bad without giving an argument against it which you haven't. You've just stated platitudes about it and compared it to some other book that's popular among teens.

>>9359822
I mean, usually plebs dislike it cause of the scene where he rapes his sister.

>>9359822
Yeah like when that pimp hit him and he started crying. What a whiney bitch.

>>9359837
Did Nabokov like any spanish language writer or work of literature?

>>9361330
No, he knew it was a shit language with no good literature. In other words, he was patrician.

Haven't read the book in years. But did anyone else feel like his old teacher petted Holden on the head for more of a "proud of you, son" thing rather than what Holden initially thought? I know my original class thought it was all sexual.

>>9359589
Probably one of my favorite novels. Salinger's style of writing just kept me occupied and I always felt like I was directly in Holden's shoes.

>>9359747

Nabakov just loved anything that involved fucking little girls.

>>9359903

The Great Gatsby sold wonders, as did This Side of Paradise.

Fitzgerald was one of the most popular figures in literature during his time.

It merely had a revival into the edge of mainstream since it began to enter the public school system.

You're an idiot.