Was Heller’s book “Catch-22” named after the US Senate Rule 22?
According to the BBC book readers club, Catch-22 is a situation in which a person is frustrated by a paradoxical rule or set of circumstances that preclude any attempt to escape from them.
I’ve been reading Robert Caro’s book on LBJ “Master of the Senate” where Caro talks about Rule 22 that was originally drafted by a bi partisan committee to get rid of filibustering at the suggestion of President Wilson. They made a mistake that basically results in a Catch-22 situation; Senate members can propose cloture but only on pending measures….so one could filibuster to their hearts content before a measure reached the floor. Southern Senators were able to use this Rule 22 for some fifty years to avoid any legislation on civil rights etc. Is Rule 22 the origin of Catch-22?
There was really a “catch 18” somewhat similar to Heller’s story; so no he did not base it on the Senate. It was all military. If you have ever served in the military, you know how accurate the book is, too.
I wrote my master’s thesis in part on Catch-22, and OttaDaFe is correct. Heller originally titled it Catch-18, and even published an early chapter under that title a few years before the novel was published. But around the time of publication, Heller and his editor saw that Leon Uris was scheduled to come out with a novel called Mila 18. Heller was crushed, and to prevent confusion, they were forced to change the title. The editor chose 22, Heller agreed, and the rest is history.
Though loosely based on Heller’s WWII experiences, much of the novel draws heavily on the politics of the 1950s, the time when it was written. Remember the loyalty oath crusade, for instance. So while the title has nothing to do with the Senate, the book does have quite a lot to do with the politics of the time.
Thanks minty green, I appreciate your insights. I think that the Senate is alot about politics. Filibustering in the Senate was a hot issue in the 50s and 60s especially. The Southern controlled Senate was highly criticized for inaction and a key strategy for delaying any motion disliked by the South was to filibuster [ie: read the phone book, read the previous Senate’s minutes word by word, talk about anything] until the hated motion was pulled back. The very rule that was adopted to limit filibustering contained a loophole to drive a DC dumptruck thru it. So Rule 22 became the ultimate “insane” rule that contradicts itself and makes you spin your wheels.
While Heller might have originally called his book Mila 18 I think you could argue that he changed it to Catch 22 because of this ridiculous rule. Catch 22 in the military; Rule 22 in the Senate. There might not be all that much difference between the bureaucratic behavior found in the US Army, Enron or IBM, and the US Senate. UUuuuhhhmm. Maybe this is master thesis material for someone???