Charlie Dean’s Blog

I’ve been a long-time fan of Johnny-O.  I just started his newest book on the recommendation of some friends.  Their church is doing a series based on this book.

When I am growing toward the me I want to be, I am being freed from the me I pretend to be.  I no longer try to convince people I am important while secretly fearing I am not.  (emphasis mine)

John Ortberg, The Me I Want to Be, p. 24

After J.D. Salinger died just over a month ago, I decided that I would re-read The Catcher in the Rye.  I read it for the first time when I was in my mid-twenties, and found it all so phony (a pathetic attempt at literary humor, I know).  I remember reading it and generally finding myself super annoyed with Holden Caulfield, the antagonist.  My theory is that if you read this novel in your late teens, you’ll identify with Holden’s teen angst.  However, if you read it a little later in life, like I did, I think you tend to find Holden to be a whiny, self-absorbed, condescending slacker.

(I’d love to hear your take on Holden Caulfield.  When did you first read the novel?  Did you like it?  Hate it?  Did you identify with Holden or loath him?)

Anyway, there are a couple of thoughts running through my head this morning…

• I did a little research, and in 1981, The Catcher in the Rye, was the most banned book in public schools, as well as the second-most taught book, at the same time.  That’s interesting.
• Of course, in my parochial school high school, in the late 80’s, early 90’s, we did NOT read it.  Personally, I don’t think I’d want my boys reading it until they are in their late teens.
• Who exactly is The Catcher in the Rye?  I had a thought last night, as I finished, that it’s Phoebe, in that she saves Holden from himself.
• I heard once, somewhere, that The Catcher in the Rye has been a popular book among assassins.  I’m not sure why, except that Holden is so immature, particularly in his relationship and judgment of other people, he’s prone to exaggeration, and hyperbole and that must somehow connect to people like Lee Harvey Oswald, Timothy McVeigh, and others.  But I’m no criminal profiler…

To me, a good non-fiction book, is one that provokes thought.  I’m really not interested in reading books that just re-say what I already believe in a new way.  I’d rather just watch TV.

What I’ve always liked about Brian McLaren is that he is apparently a glutton for punishment, and is willing to stir the pot, at the risk of being called a heretic.  In this book he doesn’t disappoint.

Here’s my simplest review: If you hate Brian McLaren, you’ll find more reason to in this book.  But, on the other hand, if you’re like me and you like to ask questions and you’re interested in how other people think and good conversations are more important to you than watertight answers, you’ll like this book.  A lot.

That doesn’t mean I agree with everything he says.  Let’s be clear about that, before my critics go off and start telling their friends that I’m a heretic because I like Brian McLaren.  It does mean, however, that I look forward to reading this book again, as soon as I can get a group of people who are willing to read it with me and discuss it.