Catcher In The Rye was the Downfall of The United States of America

Holden Caulfield is beta-cuck patient Zero. That fucking book and how hard it was pushed in schools is what started the destruction of men into spineless wimps and allowed feminism to spread uncontrolled like cancer.

Other urls found in this thread:

postflaviana.org/a-pedophile-fantasy-in-the-rye/
pu.if.ua/depart/Inmov/resource/file/samostijna_robota/Catcher_In_The_Rye_-_J_D_Salinger.pdf
twitter.com/SFWRedditGifs

I wish I had a sister like Phoebe

He just complained about everything and was a rebellious cuck

I don't get the message of the book at all

No, it was mcdonalds drive thrus. All problems can be traced to mcdonalds drive thrus.

Don't you just want to be the catcher in the rye?

Nah, if anything the book is about a boy struggling to be functional after he's been fucked up. The Man vs Society trope is not the downfall of America. The loss of the VS anything worth overcoming is

I never read this book.

We read the giver which was its own cancer
Then in 3rd grade I started reading Dune and I read all of it until 5th grade.

Then i decided books were for fags

Oh please, I feel like him today with all the leftist bullshit around me

I'm surprised you don't either

>reading assigned books
>at any point in life post '95

The golden age of the Internet, when old fuck teachers didn't understand it and it could give you every answer

I'm in my last year for my doctorate and I haven't bought a textbook or any required reading in a fucking decade, much less some pedantic high school reading assignment

Really missing out on life having not read 'the Giver', maybe I'd have a 180 IQ instead of 164

Same. English teacher I really liked said it was his favorite so I thought it would be great. I've never been so disappointed or found a book to be so utterly pointless and without plot.

I don't think it was impactful at all. It was a confusing mess that no one liked.

Now, I can't tell you the number of times I've seen to kill a mockingbird as favorite book on Facebook. That white guilt runs deep.

quit being so phony user

>Jews are not more intelligent than whites
>I am too lazy to do school

Caulfield was the opposite of that, same with Salinger, caulfield was the original pol kid

The point was that Salinger was starting with a realistic depiction of teenaged life and then using that as a basis for credibility. At that time that was new.

disagree
this is my favorite book, it's more about a kid who cant fit in with society because he believes people lose their fun, unique spirit when they grow up, and he finds refuge in children such as his sister, who is yet uncorrupted by the world

a modern equivalent is saying young kids arent exposed to degenerate trends and behavior, therefore they're more valuable personalitywise than tumblr fags and basic bitches

i have no idea why the hell you think it's about the destruction of men or whatever

>We read the giver which was its own cancer
how so? the message i got was pretty good

muh vaccines cause autism the book

Sup Forums is a really dumb board. If you really think Holden was just a winery cuck you probably missed the subtle mention of him raping his sister. You guys have zero reading comprehension I bet you'd feel lost reading lolita.

Class 08.

I remember reading this senior year.
It was literally nothing.

Or maybe i missed it.
Or probably not.

What do you say lads? Should i give it a revist at 26?

They made me read 1984, Les Mis, and Animal Farm, and then some book about the Rwandan genocide.

>the giver which was its own cancer

Book about thought policing is cancer. kek.

>decided books were for fags

D-don't read g-goyim! It's for fags!

>the giver
>CitR
>diary of ann funk
>CitR again
fuck

Catcher is practically A Portrait of Sup Forums As a Young Man.
>hates degeneracy
>hates virtue signaling
>hates hollow academic posturing
>cares about children and animals
You can practically imagine the sequel in which he learns that it was the kikes all along.

>bawwww he just complains the whole time I didn't get it
Reading isn't for everyone.

I didn't like this book at all when I first read it in high school and I was a lot more left leaning back then. We had an assignment to write an epilogue to the book and in my version of him he just becomes homeless.

>dissing based Atticus
If you think that To Kill a Mockingbird was about ebil white people, you might just have the reading comprehension of a third grader

(((J. D. Salinger)))

Finally you guys are waking up. I've been saying this for ages, this was all part of MKUltra and an attempt to push Incest on American families:

postflaviana.org/a-pedophile-fantasy-in-the-rye/

Never read it, should I though?

Whats the basic story for those who don't want me to

Rwandan genocide is pure redpill material. Darkies hunting down other darkies because they are lighter skinned. It's basically a warning not to give darkies power over anything.

Im forced to read Grapes Of Wrath and Ecotopia for a summer assignment. How fucked am I?

You should read it. The story isn't important. The prose is what makes it memorable.

This is an 18+ site

>a book no one reads is the downfall of a country
was this your summer reading assignment, op? is that why you spontaneously bring it up?

This is either bait or you have never read the book, because this is the opposite of truth. Five seconds in google and you can read the first page
pu.if.ua/depart/Inmov/resource/file/samostijna_robota/Catcher_In_The_Rye_-_J_D_Salinger.pdf

I read it because of Ghost in the Shell. Here is a summary of the book:
>kid walks around a city at night
>nothing really happens

I don't remember much, but I remember that I also wanted to be the catcher in the rye.

No, there's nothing there but hype, like Kafka or Mailer. My favorite Holocaust story is how Weimar era Jews had this whole mainstream cultural world, and it was all gone and replaced overnight. Because the Jews are contentless frauds who promote each other. Had they actually been accomplishing anything and contributing to society, it would not be possible to just get rid of it. But they had "scientists" at "institutes" that were normalizing pedophilia -- their "journals" were what Goebbels was actually burning in the consigned to the flames speech. He was burning attempts to make child rape legal abd normal, and almost every militant anti-Nazi would probably agree with burning those things if they understood.

I'm 18 and the summer readings are required for me to do as part of the dorm that I'm in. I don't actually have to do anything like essays or tests, but I have to read the books still.

>the summer readings are required for me to do as part of the dorm that I'm in
lol what the fuck

>No, there's nothing there but hype, like Kafka
What a plebeian.

Friendly reminder that it has a bloated legacy and wasn't that good.

The catcher in the rye is a pure, self-explanatorily useful, hero. He stops kids from getting hurt in a dreamlike, impossible situation. This is contrasted with a bizarre, ersatz world, where nothing works properly and everyone is a liar. It's about realizing how common corruption is and is therefore also a way for the Jew to gently spread reflexive distrust in what was at the time a good society.

Kafka was a child who never grew up. His best work is an inferior copy of the style and format of Daniil Kharms. Kafka produced no literature and has nothing to say.

>Catcher In The Rye
Never read it.
I heard it was dreadful.
Never had to read it in school either. Of course I didn't go to public schools though.

Is this why I'm red pilled? I never read catcher in the rye?

You stupid fucks don't understand Holden because you are him.

I think it had more to do with the fact we were literally taught about slavery and the civil war every fucking year

I'm not kidding, we were taught almost nothing about WWII and nothing about Vietnam nor the Korean war. Just the Civil War and Revolutionary war every fucking year.

...

And that's why the phonies just gotta die

It's true that the biggest phonies I've ever known tended to hate to book.

Kharms hadn't even published anything when Kafka died. Did you mean to drop a different name?

Yea it was also just a really good narrative. Very believable character. Excellent piece of writing. Not a lot to learn from it though.

Pheobe was top tier. She was the best character in the book.

Phoebe was a mary sue tbf

Literally just about innocence.

That's it, he find it in his sister Phoebe, and realizes, "Oh... Ok, I guess I gotta grow up eventually."

Read Kharms. Read Kafka. They are trying to do the same thing. Kharms succeeds. Kafka spins around in circles and cries.

>get prostitute
>talk to her until she wants to leave since you're so retarded
>you still pay her
this fucking book is so edgelord

My half of the grade had to read Gatsby and Cuckoo's Nest. The other half was Catcher and The Outsiders

>realistic fiction
Trash. Any statements this insufferably boring and vapid excuse for a literary genre makes about society are either empty cliches or better and more quickly stated directly without a tedious and uninspired attempt at a plot laid over them. If you want entertainment, read actual fiction and not some pseudo-intellectual's thinly-veiled mental-masturbation session. If you want to actually be intellectually stimulated, read nonfiction. If you don't heed my advice, you'll end up like the autists in this thread, arguing and circle-jerking over an unfortunate waste of a good tree.

>plot

glad the pleb filter removed you

I own my own library and every year I get boxes of this book to be shipped out to schools. From what i can gather, it's an easily read book and depicts a framework for what people are taught in school already. Maybe it's over-saturation of some form of indoctrination or perhaps it is simply easy to grade tests on for comprehensive studies.The one book they really need to ban is the Bluest Eye, one of which I also have to ship out to a lesser extent.

Gatsby is fucking magnificent. The writing is absolutely perfect, but also, the story is a look at "the" American story, not just a random kid realizing that Santa is not real.

>Reading for plot

Is this the 1700s ? Plot hasn't been a requirement for a novel in centuries, burger

That may be. I don't remember many details of the book, but I remember really enjoying he parts with Pheobe. I should probably read it again.

i love catcher in the rye, it's my favorite modern book. it's funny as hell and really sweet and innocent.

I don't know where I'd begin to rebut this brilliant literary analysis.

Gatsby shouldn't be taught in high schools. It's a waste of time. Teenagers don't have enough life experience yet.

Catcher in the Rye was a CIA plant...
postflaviana.org/a-pedophile-fantasy-in-the-rye/

>reading (((books)))

Fucking neopol.

Why isn't Blood Meridian required reading?

Do you think it would be a triggering experience guys?

quentin pls

He was some spoiled rich kid fag that cucked himself with a prositutue. His sister is more alpha than him. Pathetic typical New York liberal faggot.

This.

Look. What would you say if you found an author who had not read X, but was cranking out writing that was an inferior version of what X did? Same topics, same perspective, same style.
I'm not saying Kafka is a plaguarist, I am saying that he is a failure.

Grapes of Wrath is actually a great read.

HOW MUCH IS CORRECT THE RECORD PAYING YOU?
But do check out Steinbeck's Russian Journals.

What is redpilled required reading?

Cormac McCarthy's work crushes the soul. I've read No Country for Old Men, The Road and The Afterdark. I should pick this up, I've heard the title before.

>But do check out Steinbeck's Russian Journals.

I've read some of his writings about how he saw American families living during the Depression. I'll check this out too.

This

I'd probably hold my tongue if I couldn't think of a more substantive analysis than "I like this book more than this unrelated book".

Grapes of Wrath is very enjoyable book, but there are many communist undertones, which makes sense for Steinbeck a man who probably admired the USSR with his visits to there and writing about them

Holy shit I've been waiting for this moment. I FUCKING HATED CATCHER IN THE RYE. All it was was some mopey fucking young guy complaining about how much he hates his fucking life. You could've just inserted my teenage diary in there and there would've been no fucking difference. All this wigger did was bitch about life and he couldn't even fuck the prostitute properly. Then he skipped the fuck around NYC with his little sister? And she snuck out into NEW YORK CITY pre-Giuliani when it was one of the criminal capitals of America? Then they went to some fucking mueseum like a bunch of massive faggots. And the big climax was him having some dream about catching a bunch of little kids in field like a fucking pedophile? Honestly fuck that book and anyone who thinks its deep. Whoever the fuck allowed that book to get past the editor and printed deserves death. It was probably a fucking kike

I like how you use big words to say "you are dumb" over and over, and I deliberately used simple words to represent relationships and contrast things. Maybe if you call me dumb again it will hit a Mustafa Threshold and I will reject Jewish tribal self-promotion as an explanation for why anyone has heard of Kafka. Meanwhile, if anyone else is struggling with or required to read Kafka, you owe it to yourself to check out Kharms.

did you like the movie adaptation of No Country for Old Men? I liked it a lot.

Saying you like Catcher in the Rye is preening for pseudo intellectuals, they say this because like you- they read it, find it disappointing, don't get it, and pretend it's great; because they are afraid of being honest and exposing themselves as somehow inferior. It's like when a fantasy nerd says the prefer LotR to the Hobbit or Harry Potter. LotR is utter shit, the Hobbit is wonderful and HP is comfy.

Another good example is Moby Dick vs The Old Man and the Sea. If you prefer Melville to Hemingway you have no taste and just follow a crowd.

Literature is filled with stuff like this. People who say they like Dostoyevsky over Tolstoy, who say James Joyce is good, who have never read Orwell or Twain essays but like to name drop them.

The biggest problem is generally real men don't go into writing. The annals of history are peppered with great men, masculine figures, who go into writing. From Marcus Aurelius to Shakespeare to Hemingway.

But its almost always filled with beta cuck manlets who can't get laid. In their social and historical context the vast majority of 'great' authors were degenerate losers desperate for pussy and would basically write anything even things they deeply disagreed with, to trick women primarily into spreading their legs.

So the great works of western literature are filled with appeasements towards women. Weak, ugly men need to develop unique tools for spreading their seed. It doesn't help that almost any author you have read in school alive over the past 200 years was a raging marxist and wrote biased trash with respect to the human condition. Willfully so, because they felt it would 'benefit humanity' if they lied.

>Whoever the fuck allowed that book to get past the editor and printed deserves death.

I don't like the book, but that's retarded user. It clearly made a shitload of money, so you would be stupid not to greenlight it.

Gatsby was a fucking cuck. Never had the balls to bang the chick who obviously wanted him. The sorry bastard.

Interracial porn and sex trafficking also make a shit load of money that doesn't mean it should be produced and allowed. But I can see where you are coming from. It's the kind of corner a money loving Jew would come from, but I can see it

It was a book about a depressed teenager. About the struggles that a teenager goes through when they have a fucked up family life. How that undercurrent of familial chaos and loss affects a teenager's ability to cope with society.

The message is what you make of it and the message you take from it will change as you do.

I know nothing about literature, but I would say that 'perceived intelligence' the foundation on which every counter culture movement is build on.

I hated every book the school system recommends. They start this shit early.

The only good piece of literature to come out of english class was Watchmen.

It was pretty good.

The writing style itself is praiseworthy, but people like Proust were excellent writers with boring stories. I personally liked it because at that age I was recognizing a fundamental problem with society and explaining it as "phoniness" was pretty accurate, a kind of existential "actuality" theme here. Further, I don't know where this "pedophilia" accusation is coming from, pretty sure the dream is supposed to be about securing and protecting the future for children, an anti-corruptionist theme, not raping them in fields, that's just nonsense. Furthermore, he seems like a sperg because he kinda is, his heads halfway up his ass and halfway in the sky. He's an incompetent dreamer, but he's not "phony."

also
>not liking museums
>not thinking leaving NY is a good idea.

Reread it.

you read Watchmen in english class?

Right. The successes and limitations of our system, and human potential. Daisy, as Heartiste would lose no time in pointing out, wants to be fucked by a brutal man with "a cruel body," not vaguely fondled by a nice guy who asks permission.

>not liking LOTR

on the contrary, everyone I've met says they don't like Catcher in the Rye, I'd say it's the opposite as you put it.

This book is the definition of controlled opposition. It is edgy and relatable enough that teenagers waking up to the problems of the world accept the message that maturity means the end of rebellion. It offers ultimately self-defeating, intellectualized platitudes that deflect real, productive questioning about the state of the world and those who have a stake in making sure it stays that way.

Holden Caulfield is a Spenglerian trope weaponized to keep otherwise intelligent, thoughtful young men sad and docile.

I'll be honest with you bros. I've seen some depraved shit in my time. But I read that book to about page 50 and had to set it down for a while until I was ready to continue. I think that happened twice, and at other times it was like I couldn't stop. It has weird words that you wont be able to find in most dictionaries. It kind of forces you will think about death, humanity and civilization in ways you may have never considered. It was a redpill experience for me.

Protip: Don't listen to most literary experts' summaries about this one.

It was not about American exceptionalism, or white supremacy or any of that shit. Most experts in Academia managed to totally miss the point and simplify their stupid perception of it. Reading the reviews kind of made me cringe a little.

You guys are stupid, the book is about Holden trying to get over his little brother, Ali, and his death. Hence the whole message of the ducks and the ice pond

This. The whole idea is that the pure dream image contrasts corrupt reality. That reality itself is constitutuonally opposed to it is shown by how wierd and nonsensical it is -- Salinger is saying that this world is so messed up, if it met something pure, the pure thing would be mischaracterized as crazy.

I know you weren't around in 95 because I was and it was not the Golden Age of the internet.

>he didn't read Fahrenheit 451
>he didn't read Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance
>he didn't read War of the Worlds
>he didn't read Macbeth and Julius Caesar
>he didn't read Aristophanes and Sophocles

pleb