The Catcher in the Rye, J.D. Salinger
The Book
Holden Caufield tells us his story about how he got thrown out of school just before Christmas break and what he did in the days in between getting thrown out of school and finally being too sick to on. Along the way, he tells a fantastic number of lies, shows us he is deeply confused, worries about his sexuality, worries about if he will have sex with a girl, shows us he is in deep denial about his alcoholism, and gets into several fights, both verbal and physical. He rejects adult all adult influence, both kindly and ill meant, and instead attempts to skirt the grim realities of the life he's brought upon himself.
My Thoughts
So I only read this book because my son (and youngest child) had it assigned to him in high school. You will not be hearing an argument for or against the teaching of this book in school. My high school, being the deep south chose not to teach it, and until my kid received a bad grade on an essay for it, I found no compelling need to read it.
First of all, having read it, I now understand why J.D. Salinger is so insistent that this book is misunderstood. I have no confidence that I understand what he wanted me to believe when he wrote this, I can only tell you what I believe.
It is frequently taught that Holden Caufield, drunk, is the ultimate unreliable narrator. And to the end that Holden is the one who is telling his story, sure, I get it. But is he really the narrator? I know, it's easy to think he is the narrator. But that feeds into the fiction that Holden is the one who is telling us his story. Something, that if you are a fan, you will need to go back and think about.
You see, I believe that what we are reading are the carefully edited notes of Holden's psychologist. That makes the decision maker here, not Holden, but the in the terms of the age and inside the book Holden's psychoanalyst. We see Holden as the analyst sees him., manipulative, self absorbed, troubled, violent, delusional and sensitive. We doubt Holden's view of what happened, but not if the events happened. Some of which cannot be corroborated.
I know, because Holden is telling the story, it's easy to believe he's the narrator, manipulating the information, controlling the content and the pace. But Holden is using a speaking voice. The novel is written as Holden telling us a story, not writing a story, not recording it to a diary, but telling a human being the story.
We know Holden lies to us the reader, both a close reading and a casual reading makes it apparent that he lies to us. And yet, it's almost the first thing he really tells us, is that he's a liar. He knows he's a liar. So we have no reason to believe that the events, any of the events actually happened. So why do we believe him?
Because that's the job of a psychologist. To draw out the relevant events from the patient. To have the patient talk about real world things and explore the story of their own life until the patient, in the words of character Carl Luce "orders your thoughts". And what does "Old Luce" know about it? His father is an analyst.
The narrative breaks about once every eight thousand words, wrapping up one set of thoughts before delving into another. And true, it usually happens between days in the narrative. So the end of Friday Holden goes to sleep and we pick up the next day. But not always. And it sometimes Holden's story takes weird jumps backwards in time. The best example of this is Holden spends a page and half telling us about his friend James Castle. Then three pages later, when he goes to visit a teacher from the school where he knew James Castle, he tell us he told us about.
And I ask you, who does that? Three pages is like 600 words, max. Not even five minutes later in speaking time. (Seriously, narrators are told to estimate between 9000 and 10,000 words per hour. 600 words is then between three and half and four minutes later.) That's too close to ask someone if they remember the if someone remembers what you were talking about. It makes more sense if it were two separate sessions. So if Holden has to remind someone later, then whose ideas are we reading?
And there are other clues that Holden is speaking to a therapist. He opens with rebelling against the standard therapist opening questions. And even in the closing pages of the book he talks about how much he hates one of the psychoanalysts at the hospital. He's done telling his part of the story. And he knows, this person is about to start the "real work" of therapy. The clear implication is Holden rejects the help of the hospital, but is comfortable enough with the person on the other end of the pen. Comfortable enough to tell the person know, without rancor. He draws his little line in the sand and is done talking about it. But again, Holden anticipates or is responding to the adult, and it's clearly an adult, on the other side of the conversation. This story isn't for us the reader, it's for the next person who comes along to "help" Holden. It's clean and as unbiased as the analyst can get. It gives us the illusion that Holden is telling his own story, and the hand behind getting Holden, notoriously closed mouthed to open up is unseen.
This isn't Holden's story. These are the case notes, the clean case notes, of someone who is evaluating Holden. Someone who is on the staff. Probably whoever is in charge of whether he stays or goes. That means, no matter what Holden told the person taking the notes, we only see what that person selected. We don't see how the case worker put Holden back on track. We don't see the efforts of the caseworker to bond with Holden. We don't see that person's professional opinion, except that we do.
Holden never tell anyone in the whole narrative the truth. Ever. He never just comes out and says what he wants from them. He rejects every effort of every person to bond with him. So then, why do we see these events at all? Because a skilled case worker is ordering Holden's thoughts. What we see is a patient, brilliant mind who is just letting Holden be Holden. Someone who knows the kid cannot be forced. Someone who knows, in the parlance of psychology, "You cannot change what you do not acknowledge." We see a person who is waiting for Holden to finish telling his story.
Yes, Holden uses stream of consciousness to bounce from idea to idea, but we aren't seeing irrelevant things. We are seeing the things that the next doctor will need if that person wants to help Holden. We see it in Holden's words, which is what makes this a clean copy, possibly for the court or Holden's parents. But we see what the therapist thinks is important. We see the therapist's editorial hand.
And for all of you teachers out there who believe the book ends on a positive note, I have words for you. You. Are. Just. Wrong. Holden is no more motivated to pick up his life and become something at the end of the book than he was at the beginning. He doesn't feel better. He isn't less depressed. He's just there, giving up. And the FACT that he's in the hospital isn't a good thing. The psych ward, if that's where he is, isn't a good place. That's not hope, it's despair. And Holden shows no interest in getting better. He only interested in remaining a child.
How Much My Library Card Saved Me
This book came from my son's school, and it went back after he was done reading it. It's in pretty good condition. And I'm not certain how often these books need to be replaced. We were not the first people to read it, nor will we be the last. The book cost $8.99, but I won't be adding that to the total. Because if my kid had not hated the book so much, and fought so hard with his teacher about the interpretation, I would not have read it. Yes, I just laid out a long list of theories about this book, but I hated reading it. I have zero interest in Holden's petty problems. And if I did not need to have a discussion with my kid's teacher about the book, I would have quit halfway through.
Still Here?
Do me a huge favor and subscribe to the blog. To get it in your inbox, subscribe here. Thanks, it means the world to me!
Comments