The Catcher in the Rye is
about as real a book as I've read. Not only was it enthralling from the very
beginning, but its charm was grounded on the purest simplicity - which, if I'm
being honest, is not simple at all. It is written in such a clever way that it
made it impossible for me to get unhooked or feel distant. Why distant? Because
its writing style and protagonist made the story feel incredibly close. To my
mind, The Catcher in the Rye is not a book, but rather a
person telling me his story (corny, I know, but not all that much).
In the novel, the invariability of society can clearly be appreciated,
especially in how everyone is expected to be and act a certain way, for
instance, going to football matches and giving the time to girls would be
expected of Pencey students, aiming to be like Stradlater, and if not, doing
whatever it was that guys like Stradlater wanted. Moreover, everyone seemed to
think and act the same, pretending as much as needed to fit in a social pattern
without even realising it. The world is full of phonies, as Holden Caulfield
would clearly state by using that same word thirty five times (according to
prooffreader) throughout the novel -although I certainly feel like I read the
word over a thousand times.
However, as much as Holden hated phonies, he couldn't bring himself to
blame them, for he was aware of the unspoken rules that were to be followed
unless you wanted to be left out from earth -and I'm not exaggerating (at least
not that much). To illustrate, there was a moment in which Holden meets the
date of Lillian Simmons.
'The Navy guy and I told each other we were glad to've met
each other. Which always kills me. I'm always saying "Glad to've met
you" to somebody I'm not at all glad I met. If you want to stay
alive, you have to say that stuff, though'.
Even though Caulfield does not agree with those conventions, he still
follows them to avoid troublesome moments. Therefore, regardless of his dislike
towards phony people, he gets the reason why they are that way.
This subtopic of the novel may be related to existentialism, which is a
philosophical branch in which people seek to unveil themselves as they live
making only personal choices -which are not based on a general truth- since the
key is to forget laws and traditions. This philosophy gives special importance
to the principles of freedom and authenticity, which, according to the
protagonist, nobody follows. From an existentialist point of view, abiding by
rules would lead to an inauthentic existence.
Although the protagonist does not hold a defiant attitude towards
society -for Holden is yellow, he admitted so himself-, the mere
act of questioning the status quo may be considered on the existentialist side.
It must be said that wondering about people's behaviour is already a big step
ahead of the majority of society. Holden Caulfield's questioning is unique,
unlike everyone else pretending to be someone they are supposed to be for
unbeknownst reasons (but what does it matter to them anyway?).
Sadly, Holden does not fully realise people's wrong-doing. He keeps
saying he is crazy, but isn't a society that punishes digression so harshly and
that expects him to unify and simplify even
the most complicated of thoughts the crazy one? I believe digression is not
always avoidable, it also is not necessarily bad. The same goes for not
unifying or simplifying. Is simplifying things always the best path? Like
Caulfield would say: 'I mean you can't hardly ever simplify and unify something
just because somebody wants you to'. Sometimes the only way of expressing
ourselves is to be all over the place.
In the end, one cannot possibly know whether one is being a phony or
not. There will be a way of autoconvincing ourselves we are not for sure. Who
can possibly tell anyway?
'Even if you did go around saving guys' lives and all, how would you
know if you did it because you really wanted to save guys' lives, or because
you did it because what you really wanted to do was be a terrific lawyer, with
everybody slapping you on the back and congratulating you in court when the
goddam trial was over, the reporters and everybody, the way it is in the dirty
movies?'
To sum up, we might want to be as natural as possible, but escaping
social conventions is a hard -if not impossible- task. Awareness about these
issues is very significant though and thinking further should always be
welcomed.
References
References
Existentialism. (n.d.). Retrieved from http://www.allaboutphilosophy.org/existentialism.htm
Salinger, J. D. (1951). The Catcher in the Rye.
Word Cloud of The Catcher in the Rye ~ prooffreader.com. (n.d.). Retrieved from http://www.prooffreader.com/2013/09/word-cloud-catcher-in-rye_9.html
-
-
Este comentario ha sido eliminado por el autor.
ResponderEliminarEste comentario ha sido eliminado por el autor.
ResponderEliminarDaniela,
ResponderEliminarI agree with you on the introduction of your post; reading "Catcher in the rye" actually gives you a feeling of "closeness" with the speaker of the story. I think this is partly because Salinger encapsulates a whole generation in this book, and certainly, a generation with which we can feel identified with.
There must have been at least someone in our lives, who thinks that everything is "phony" and "fake" in our society. Or perhaps even ourselves. The question is open, as you mentioned in your post.
I’d like to go back to the part where you explained how aware Holden is about the “unspoken rules” that had to be followed in order to not be “eaten away” by society, such as the scene where Holden meets the Navy guy.
It’s true: Holden knows all the social conventions that are necessary to not have any troubles with “phonies”. Nonetheless, he hates them, as much as he hates people and their phony lives.
This is the moment where I think of the topic of “contradiction” in the book. Holden mentions as much as he can, how little he can stand people, because they’re all pretending.
I think Holden pretends just as much as other people do. Holden is someone who is always fighting against appearances, fake representations and all that; however, he also acts in a fake way in order to avoid “trouble”. But that is the thing: this does not make Holden very authentic, in the sense that he doesn’t really stand up for what he really believes in. I think this simple handshake and “nice to meet you”, goes beyond a basic salutation. The fact that he “adapts” to the phoniness, makes him in fact, just as phony as others.
This novel gives a lot to think about. One thing I’m sure of is that Holden is living a journey in which he needs to embrace contradiction.
I liked your post a lot!