Romance? Romeo and Juliet?
It’s two kids who practically go insane lusting after each other. They meet and get married 24 hours later; they don’t know enough about each other to be in love. In fact, they don’t really know anything about each other. They just sort of meet and go berzerk.
There’s a possibility that I misread it, but I don’t think R+J is a love story at all.
Romeo and Juliet for the 1337 for those who haven’t seen it yet.
I’m going to reread the book now. I just remembered the part where he freaks out over breaking a record he bought for his sister. Anyone remember why?
[hijack]
In 7th grade I had to read The Outsiders under my English teacher’s idea that “this applies to teenagers, particually this generation.” I thought this statement was bull. (As Holden would say it, my teacher was phoney. :D) Has anyone else read this book and have any idea why my teacher had this idea?
[/hijack]
and one last thing…
I’ve read it twice. It’s a tradgedy. Buckleberry was being sarcastic. 
English teachers must love killing Shakespeare.:rolleyes:
I read it, and for the best reason ever. One of my favourite bands, The Get Up Kids has a song called Stay Gold Ponyboy, which I found out was a line from this book. So I read the book.
I thought it was pretty good, but it was obviously a young adult book, which I wasn’t at the time. So I couldn’t get into it as much as I could have had I read it when I was 13 or something. And a lot of it was rather simplistic. But I didn’t think it was a bad read.
I like Romeo and Juliet, but as far as Shakespeare doing love stories, I think A Midsummer Night’s Dream is much better.
RubyStreak, I think we need to start the SDMB Catcher In The Rye Fan Club.
Next to his dead brother, his sister is the person he loves the most, they have a lot in common. Also, he knew that his sister would love that record. I know I would freak if I broke something I bought as a dear gift for someone I love.
Another thing is that Holden feels sad knowing that his sister is growing up and losing some of her childhood innocence.
The whole book is Holden’s account of his nervous breakdown. Do you really expect much clarity and some sense in someone who is going through a breakdown?
I remember that when I read it for school, the teacher gave me an oral presentation topic on why the ending was happy. I told her I didn’t believe it was, and she let me do a presentation, with cites, showing both arguments but siding with the “not happy” ending.
I read it when I was in high school, didn’t think much of it. A couple hundred pages of Holden bitching, and everyone thinks “My God! This is them most accurate depiction of the teenage years I’ve ever read! This Holden fellow, he swears! He must be a spot-on relation to kids!” Anyhow, I think it’s an OK book, just overrated.
However, I did have the worlds worst teacher for it…Rubystreak’s two paragraphs were more (and better) than anything my teacher said during the whole time (a few weeks) we were “studying” it. That may have made it more difficult to appreciate it’s genius, but I say, if you need somebody to explain it to you, it’s not that great (I’m only talking about things that are supposed to have emotional impact. Don’t flame me for saying that quantum mechanics is simplistic garbage). I don’t know thing one about music, but I know that Beethoven is really good, because I like his music. Don’t know thing one about art, either, but I do know that Starry (sp?) Night is great, because I like it.
Not in the least.
My vote goes with many of the others already cast: read it. I know I fail to appreciate the time investment that reading can be for some people, but one way or the other, you will be informed on your own terms. To me, that’s always well worth the investment of time, since I don’t care to rely solely on anyone’s judgment save my own [and my own’s flawed enough!]
I tried any number of classics early on and thoroughly disliked them. Then, for one reason or another, I went back and revisited several of them years later – and found, to my surprise, that I thoroughly enjoyed them. Your tastes and appreciation do change as life goes on and your schema broadens. Doesn’t really have anything to do with age, though, I think.
I’ve also been known to read books I suspected I would dislike, or even thoroughly disliked, for the same reason that on occasion, I’ll force myself to go read articles or literature put out by people or groups with points of view with which I disagree with strongly. It’s a good mind-stretching exercise, and I generally come away with it with some new perspective I didn’t have before. For that reason alone, I’d say finish CITR, even if you hate it.
Last but not least, I never agree with or say that any piece of literature is shit, dross or the like. I’ll agree that I may not like it, or that in my view, it’s overrated, or that, for whatever reason, it doesn’t do a darn thing for me. However, every work of art, literature or music speaks to someone on some level. It just may not speak to me in particular. Doesn’t make it bad. Secondly, if it’s published, that’s indicative of an effort that’s better than what 99.9% of the world can manage to do. [One of my pet peeves: people who boast that they could ‘whip out a book’ in some genre or the other in a weekend. I’ve always wanted to see those folks actually try it sometime – and get their weekend warrior effort published. Fat chance.] But in any event, the creator went to a notable effort, and I’ll respect that, if nothing else.
And incidentally, I thought R&J was almost as much a comedy of errors as a tragic love story. But that’s me. I still liked it, although Henry V remains my favorite of Will’s plays [thus far].
I think you put your finger on it. It’s a Seinfeld prequel, a story that isn’t. I finally got around to reading it a few years ago. I wanted to see what all the shouting was about. I still don’t know. It seemed to me like a stream of barely-consciousness. Maybe I was too old to identify with Holden Caulfield. Maybe I was just in the wrong mood. Maybe I just didn’t get it. Whatever the reason, put me in the “hated it” column.
This is great! I read Catcher in the Rye when I was 26 and doing a Creative Writing course. We had an online discussion group for the students in the course, and when I posted asking why it was considered such an important piece of American literature, I got shouted down - everyone loved it.
Nice to finally meet some people who had the same reaction I did.
That said, I finished it, and I would recommend it to others. Not because I thought it was great, but because it is a classic (meaning that almost everyone has an opinion about it - gives you something to talk about).
What irked me about Holden was his lack of coherent thought, (read whining), and his holier-than-thou attitude. He thought he knew more about everything than everyone, that he was a better person than everyone (the scene with the nun ticked me off). As I said to a co-worker who grew up rich in America, “what can Holden possibly have to rebel against? You can’t be a proper rebel if you grew up on Fifth Avenue!” (I admit, I was generalizing.)
Also, in reference to Romeo and Juliet - my least favourite of the plays, for basically the same reasons - little kids playing that they are grown-ups and &*%^# it up royally.
Rumblefish, also by S.E. Hinton, is excellent as well.
“Acute perception doesn’t make you crazy. However, sometimes it may drive you crazy.”
Dogchow - Rumblefish, also by S.E. Hinton, is excellent as well; you might like it, even if you didn’t enjoy The Outsiders:
“Acute perception doesn’t make you crazy. However, sometimes it may drive you crazy.”