Tags: Baldrige DissertationsSports Shop Business PlanTransport Essay WritingKreutzer Thesis Mit81 Fresh And Fun Critical-Thinking ActivitiesCollege Thesis Of Michelle ObamaIs The Cost Of College Too High Essay
There have been, of course, those with reservations.
Holden Caulfield, the main character who tells his own story, is an extraordinary portrait, but there is too much of him. In the course of 277 pages, the reader wearies of [his] explicitness, repetition and adolesence, exactly as one would weary of Holden himself.
And this reader at least suffered from an irritated feeling that Holden was not quite so sensitive and perceptive as he, and his creator, thought he was.
Holden's mercurial changes of mood, his stubborn refusal to admit his own sensitiveness and emotions, his cheerful disregard of what is sometimes known as reality, are typically and heart-breakingly adolescent. Certainly you'll look a long time before you'll meet another youngster like Holden Caulfield, as likable and, in spite of his failings, as sound.
This first review, along with dozens upon dozens of other gushing essays, accolades, inclusion on nearly every "Best Books of the Twentieth Century" list, and one of the best word-of-mouth buzz campaigns in literary history, cemented its reputation as 's publication.
That repetition (everyone is a "damn phony" to Holden Caufield) is wearing to contemporary audiences, as Jennifer Schuessler noted in 2009.
“Holden Caulfield is supposed to be this paradigmatic teenager we can all relate to, but we don’t really speak this way or talk about these things,” noted one teacher Schuessler interviewed.
For most of the book, Holden sees this as a primary virtue.
It is very closely related to his struggle against growing up.
In the August 1951 , James Stern chose an approach that, unfortunately, was popular nationwide. Gets kind of monotonous." Still others condemned the novel.
Attempting to review the novel in the voice of its narrator, he offered such strained turns as, "This Salinger, he's a short-story guy. (July 19, 1951) complained of the "wholly repellent" vulgarity and "sly perversion" of the piece, concluding that no one who truly loved children could have written such a work.