There were many good and bad things I found in
Catcher in the Rye. The novel read more like an entry from Holden Caulfield's journal than an average novel. I kind of liked this because in a personal journal, a person writes down every detail and every emotion, so having the novel set up in this way allows the reader to more deeply enter the thoughts of Holden Caulfield and have a better understanding of how he feels about certain situations. What I didn't really like about this setup is that in a journal, there is no novel structure to it, so therefore there is no rising action, climax, falling action, etc. This is what keeps me interested in a novel, and at times I found
Catcher in the Rye to be a bit boring and unorganized at times. Another thing I really like about
Catcher in the Rye was how Holden addresses the reader as "you." It makes the reader feel like an old friend of Holden's and allows the reader to have an active part in the story.
Overall, I felt that Catcher in the Rye was a very good choice for our class to read. I would recommend it to others, but I would warn that the lack of structure might make for a confusing or difficult time reading it.
*When reading my writing, please tell me if anything I have said is off topic.*
Coll, I really liked your post. I liked how you arranged it. I felt me and you had some similar ideas. I also thought that it had no structure, there was no climax or anything to look forward to. This is what makes me and i guess you also enjoy and pay attention to the book. Great job,
ReplyDeleteI wonder what your ideas are about why Salinger chose to write in this style. Does form follow function and vice versa? In other words, does the story of Holden Caulfield that Salinger writes connect in ways to the narrative style that he develops for his protagonist? I'd be interested to see you push your analysis further to consider the interplay between these two aspects of the novel.
ReplyDelete