The Catcher in the Rye by J. D. Salinger

I’ll try to keep this review brief, because I really did not enjoy reading this book. There are a few things, in retrospect, that I find redeeming about “The Catcher in the Rye” by J. D. Salinger, including that it does a good job putting you inside the mind of a person exhibiting traits consistent with mental disorder. With that in mind, this book is controversial enough (and short enough) that you should probably read it and form your own opinion.

I did not find this book to be pleasant reading. The number one reason I found reading this book to be laborious was due to the frequent use of “the name of the Lord thy God in vain.” (Exodus 20:7). Having to navigate through the text while trying to deal with the frequent betrayal of the third commandment made it difficult to relax and just read. I may have been able to get past that if the story was interesting, but it is rather boring and uninspiring. The characters all seem to be angry or hypocritical or both, without much difference between the characters. Granted, this may be on purpose because of the perspective of the narrator of the book. This leads to some qualities that, having completed my reading, I’ve determined that I liked.

“The Catcher in the Rye” is written from the perspective of Holden Caulfield, who appears in the text to be suffering from manic depression. This was the most interesting part of the book, and it didn’t really spark my interest until after I had finished reading. Even the use of God’s name in vain, along with other mild to moderate language used in the book exhibits as a symptom of the mental disorder. If “The Catcher in the Rye” has any real value, it may be in being able to see many of the traits of manic depression in a believable context.

A hidden gem in this book comes in the form of a teacher quoting Wilhem Stekel in the 24th chapter as he tries to communicate his concern as to the path Holden is taking in his life. The quote is, “the mark of the immature man is that he wants to die nobly for a cause, while the mark of the mature man is that he wants to live humbly for one.” This quote is embedded in the middle of one of the best arguments for pursuing education and the value of applying yourself therein that I have read, which culminates in the words “…nine times out of ten [brilliant and creative men who are educated and scholarly] have more humility than the unscholarly thinker.” This thought that knowledge in the mind of a brilliant thinker will mature into humility is an idea that has great merit, and certainly deserves contemplation. This is, at least, a good reason to read the 24th chapter.

There are also other reasonable arguments for why you should read this book. It does give an interesting perspective of the culture of New York in the 1950’s. Also, the narration of the story is very fractured, almost like reading many short stories along the central story’s path, but it always maintains forward momentum, which is different than other books I’ve read. If the main plot was interesting this bird-walking narrative style probably could have made the novel quite compelling. The lack of conclusion to the story would usually ruin a book, but in this case it fits the book well, which is another aspect that could have been quite compelling if the story was enjoyable. Furthermore, Holden’s contrast in feelings for his siblings compared to his feelings towards the rest of the world is actually very interesting, and again would be great support for a decent plot. I don’t know that these are great reasons to read the book, but they at least make the time spent reading not seem completely wasted.

I don’t recommend “The Catcher in the Rye” as a must read, but its notoriety alone probably makes it a book you should read. While you will probably not enjoy the book if your background is similar to mine, there are some aspects of the book that make it unique and interesting enough to warrant spending the time to read it.

One word of caution, however: If you want to express a negative opinion of the book, don’t do so without reading it first.

Atlas Shrugged by Ayn Rand

“Atlas Shrugged” by Ayn Rand was a very difficult book to read, because it is not an interesting narrative whose purpose is to weave a story and suspend the conclusion for the entertainment of the reader, but is rather a very, very, very long parable designed to effectively prove the validity of a philosophy, namely objectivism. While Ayn Rand did an extremely good job of presenting her philosophy in “Atlas Shrugged” and wrapping it in a narrative that was often compelling, her book fails to be great fiction and should rather be read for non-fictional purposes as a means for understanding the intricate details of the application of objectivism. As a parable, “Atlas Shrugged” is very compelling and applicable in today’s political climate. While I don’t recommend “Atlas Shrugged” as a great novel, I do recommend you read this book if you feel that the wealthy business owners are robbing their workers of compensation that is the laborers’ entitlement.

Yes, you can.

“Atlas Shrugged” is a science fiction novel that follows the American political system through a collapse due to introduction of “emergency” laws that bring a socialistic system of rule, during which the opposition to these “emergency” laws is not to fight them, but to stop producing commodities that can be seized by those in power. People are divided into producers, competent laborers and moochers (also called rotters, leeches, looters and other names). Generally, producers create things (ore from a mine, crops from a farm, well-crafted art, realistic philosophies, scientific break-throughs), competent laborers work hard and successfully for these producers to enable there production and wealth (and are well compensated for their efforts) and the moochers try to manipulate moral codes to shame the producers and competent laborers into giving the moochers a portion of their wealth for reasons that only manipulated moral codes justify. Politicians in this book are universally in the category of the moocher (one of the leading moochers is even named Wesley Mooch). Successful and competent businessmen are producers. Dishonest and scheming businessmen are moochers. Competent laborers are highly valued by the producers and feared/despised by the moochers. This classification stems from the basic tenets of objectivism, which is, according Ayn Rand:
1) “Nature, to be commanded, must be obeyed.” – You can’t master science by pretending the laws of nature don’t exist.
2) “You can’t eat your cake and have it too” – You can’t consume something and expect it to still be there.
3) “Man is an end in himself” – Seeking your own survival as a rational being is the most basic virtue.
4) “Give me liberty or give me death” – Trading value for value by mutual consent is good; Forcing the exchange of goods with threat of force is bad. Redistributing wealth is evil.

As a novel, “Atlas Shrugged” starts with promise but ends up being boring and long. The story itself seems to grind to a halt in part three of the book and the reader must trudge through endless pages of essays on objectivism to come to the somewhat anticlimactic conclusion. If you boiled out all of the essays and made the novel to contain just the story, it wouldn’t be considered a great story.

The heroine of the story, the railroad executive named Dagny Taggart, is compelling but fairly disloyal and wishy-washy in her relationships. This is presented as a virtue, because to be loyal would be to deny her true feelings. As a heroine of objectivism I’m sure Dagny Taggart is almost perfect…but as a human hero, her desires shift a bit too frequently to make her trustworthy.

As a parable, “Atlas Shrugged” is exceptional. By placing her philosophy in a very carefully controlled atmosphere she is able to manipulate a very persuasive argument for objectivism. Her characters choices are realistic and usually believable, making the characters themselves seem much more human, which in turn makes the events seem very plausible. Furthermore, the political environment created in the story was so similar to today’s that it was eerie. “Atlas Shrugged” serves objectivism well as a parable.

I’m not going to spend a lot of time on the ideas of objectivism other than to say that I find it to be very interesting and to contain a lot of truth, but it is also rather self-promoting and inflammatory. Where Ayn Rand’s essays on objectivism become wearisome is when they start playing games with phrase meanings in order to illicit a response. For example, the “Love of money” in the 6th chapter of Timothy is akin to seeking to get gain without doing the work to produce, i.e. a robber loves money so he lies in wait to steal it. “Love of money” in objectivism is reinterpreted as the virtue of wanting to work hard to produce, akin to the attitudes of the first and second servants (given 5 and 2 talents) in the parable of the talents in Matthew chapter 25. The two ideas actually agree as to what the actual virtue is, so repurposing the phrase to try to create a division is frustrating.

If you want to read good fiction, pass over this novel. If you want to learn more about objectivism and have a chance to compare it and your philosophy, this novel will be a good one for you to read.

A word of warning, however: upon finishing this novel I didn’t want to read anything for several days because I was tired of trying to last through page after page of repetitive essays. No book should make you dislike reading; this one does.