Rating: 
Summary: Good, but not great.
Review: I fear that the difference between an important book and a great book have become distinctly blurred by time, grown old and tired, out of focus, like my own eyes, which don't operate too well without a glass covering.I first read this book in high school. Seems to be a rite of passage. Frankly, considering the language, I'm susprised it was assigned reading, but that's progress for you. My memories of the book were sparse, to say the least. Seems to me I thought it terribly important at the time, but as time and I moved on (frequently in different directions, though he always seemed able to find me when I least wanted him to), the book moved further and further away from me; or, perhaps, I moved further away from it. I decided to re-read it recently. I read it in a single afternoon. Not because it was a page-turner or I felt I couldn't possibly put it down. Mostly because it was so short that I knew I'd be disappointed in myself if I didn't scratch it all out in one day. I came away from it the second time distinctly dissatisfied. Perhaps it was because my station in life had changed. Perhaps it was because I'd just read "Studs Lonigan" immediately beforehand and recognized that "Studs" was so emminently superior. Perhaps I had simply grown older, and, having taken a trip back home to visit old friends, discovered that they had remained the immature brats they'd always been; and I wondered to myself, "Was I like this? Was I this supremely annoying?" "Catcher in the Rye" was daring in its frankness and language for its day. It still seems frank, even today. But sheer frankness is not enough to qualify a book as great. "Ulysses" was frank as well, but it was also artfully done, and still prompts debate to this day regarding almost every facet of its text. Is it right to compare "Catcher in the Rye" to a masterpiece such as "Ulysses", or, perhaps, other novels such as "Sound and the Fury", "Song of Solomon" or "Gravity's Rainbow"? Of course, it is; if you want to call a book great, it must be stacked against the greatest. And, stacked against the greatest, "Catcher in the Rye" falls short. It is an important book in the chronicle of English literature. But it is not great.
Rating: 
Summary: There's a little Holden Caulfield in all of us.
Review: I feel lucky not to have read this literary masterpiece in school when I was younger, because I think my lack of understanding of the book may have lead me to never read it again. Entering a few short days of a 16 year-old young man, I was reminded of my own teenage life and the feelings it stirred in me. The level at which Salinger portrays the thoughts, the feelings, and the level of understanding of a 16 year old's mind is wonderfully fascinating. Having finished the book, I can see why it's on so many banned book lists, and it's not because of the crude language that comes out of Caulfield's mouth. It's because the book is real, the characters are so real, and that level of realness can be scarry. Read it. Get scared.
Rating:
Summary: This is my favorite book ever, but why?
Review: I feel that this trivializes modern american society in that it becomes every teenage boy (with somewhat of a mind) and tells everyones fantasy. We love Holden for his views and ideals. We love the book for the way it shows us everything about eachother. I feel that this should not be required reading in schools for every kid should feel the need to read a decent book but should not be forced into it by some adult school board. We should all become whoever we want to be but not be forced into it by someone else.
Rating: 
Summary: This book didn't keep my interest and Where was the plot?
Review: I felt that this book wasn't very interesting. It didn't keep my interest and I didn't like that idea of a plotless book. I felt that there should be more about the mental institute and the ending was terrible. I didn't want to keep reading and unless I new that he was psychotic and in a mental institute. I probably wouldn't have keep reading. I think they should have given a reason of why Holden Caulfield was entered into a mental institute. The book ended to abruptly.
Rating: 
Summary: Pointless
Review: I felt The Catcher in the Rye was written childishly and it didn't get to the point. Most books that teenagers are encouraged to read usually show a moral, lesson, or value in the text. No events occurred to make the plot interesting. I felt strongly that this book showed nothing else but simply a boy who needs help. Holden's outlook on life depressed me because he always looked for the bad in everything and everyone. I always try to relate with the main character of a book, and I was really hoping to get on the same page with Holden. Nothing good ever happened to him, but it's almost like he didn't want anything good to happen. He never got up the nerve to do anything he set up to do, such as calling Jane. Then he got with Sally. I really don't understand why. I think he wanted to drag her down in to his depressing world, poor girl. Also I don't understand why he thinks everyone's phony; he's the only phony one. I don't understand how so many opinions of this book could be high. I must be missing something. Maybe I am, but anyone who enjoyed this book must be able to relate to depressed people.
Rating:
Summary: 'Catcher' review
Review: I find "Catcher in the Rye" accurate in describing the way that troubled teens feel. I really enjoy Holdens' negative views toward the world, it made me feel that I was not the only person unhappy with certain aspects of the world around us. Also, I think that I learned a lot about others views of the negative people, often feeling sorry for Holden and the situation that he got himself into in the story.
Rating:
Summary: The catcher in the rye
Review: I find it a beautiful story. I admire the manner how the writer wrote the story: the language (the change from 'written' English and 'spoken' English) and the fluent way of telling everything. (During the reading of the book, I had the feeling that I was drifting on the water).
Sometimes are the descriptions too long (for example the museum, Jezus and the belief,...). Holden also tells too much about the things that happened in the past and that aren't necessary for mention because it hasn't to do anything with the (main) story.
The most beautiful parts of the story are the times when Holden and Phoebe are together. I find it lovely how they talk and cheer up each other. Especially when Phoebe stays there with here suitcase and says that she will go with him, when Holden is waiting in the rain while Phoebe is sitting on the carrousel and when holden cries and Phoebe comfort him. You can feel how much they love each other. I couldn't imagine before that a brother and a sister could be such of good friends.
I can see in Holden a friend of my which also has a lot of troubles with school and the system, only the way of ending up the story is spiteful different. Rinse de Kok
Rating:
Summary: Wrong interpretations
Review: i find it amusing that those who give it so few stars do not get the essence of the book, that of what it is like to be shown the ugliness of the world, the loss of innocence. its not a book about teenage angst or rebellion, if it was then why would it be required reading for so many years? it has carried such a literary torch because it can easily be translated into any era or generation, untill a utopian society is formed.
Rating:
Summary: intersting novel
Review: I find that the novel The Catcher in the Rye is a very interesting book. It is the best novel I ever read that related to teenagers life. It showed the struggle that every teen faces in life.
Rating: 
Summary: Bleh
Review: I find this book iritating to the core. The main character wastes away his young life complaining about how crapy society is and how phonie everything is asnd does this for ever an ever and ever. I honestly do not know why this is a "Classic." It has none of wonderfu; messages you find in other classic books, such as For whom the bell tolls and to kill a mocking bird. It was a torment to read, only heightened when I found out that the author is just like his character...a reclusive, winey, utterly self absorbed man who refuses to actaully try to change the world, instead just hiding away from it.
| 
