Catcher in the Rye Essay: Eight Early Reviews :: Catcher Rye Essays

Eight Early Reviews of The Catcher in the Rye      Ã‚  Ã‚   Published in 1951, J. D. Salinger's debut novel, The Catcher in the Rye, was one of the most controversial novels of its time. The book received many criticisms, good and bad. While Smith felt the book should be "read more than once" (13), Goodman said the "book is disappointing" (21). All eight of the critics had both good and bad impressions of the work. Overall, the book did not reflect Salinger's ability due to the excessive vulgarity used and the monotony that Holden imposed upon the reader.      Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚   Agreeing with Smith was Stern, saying "the book should be read again." There are many reasons for accepting this comment. Peterson, for example, felt that Holden Caulfield's "spirit is intact," while Stern enjoyed Phoebe's good personality.   Phoebe was important because she "preserve[d] Holden's innocence" (Jones). In the end, she keeps Holden at home with his family - after all, who knows what Holden could be up to, living by himself? He has been "trying to live up to his height, to drink with men, to understand mature sex and why he is still a virgin at his age" (Smith 13). It is because of this personality, that Salinger is able to "make the reader chuckle" (Breit). Phoebe is also important to Holden because he "finds a human warmth in [her]" (Engle).      Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚   Despite all these positives, many critics felt the book was lacking a great deal. There were many reasons given for not liking The Catcher in the Rye: the vulgarity, the monotony, and the immature personality of the protagonist. To put it bluntly, "one expects something more" out of Salinger (Goodman 21).      Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚   All through the book, Holden, as well as his "friends", uses vulgar language. Because of this, Longstreth feels the book is "not fit for children." Although vulgar language is used in the real world, it was very rarely encountered in literature. Other critics agreed with Longstreth, Peterson said the book was "obscene," while Smith warned readers "be advised to let the book alone" if they are bothered by this language. It is Jones' feeling that this language could only be mouthed by a "disturbed adolescent," and that Holden is "immoral and perverted" (Longstreth).      Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚   The language was only part of the problem. The book, in many critics' eyes, was monotonous.