The New York Times published this article today. It included interesting observations about why today’s teens don’t relate to Holden Caulfield.
Alas, one of these observations provoked the high school debater in my head.
Barbara Feinberg, in an e-mail to The New York Times: “Holden is somewhat a victim of the current trend in applying ever more mechanistic approaches to understanding human behavior … Compared to the early 1950s, there is not as much room for the adolescent search, for intuition, for empathy, for the mystery of the unconscious and the deliverance made possible through talking to another person.”
Emphasis added. I think that today’s YA novels, many of which are masterpieces, are addressing that need better than Holden does. It’s not because Catcher in the Rye is something teens can no longer understand because they don’t understand whining, or feeling alone, or wanting to experience something new. It’s because the current generation has good literature to read that documents their struggles.
For instance, my top two authors of ‘08, as you may remember, were E. Lockhart and Laurie Halse Anderson. They’re both writers who address Big Complex Issues, write well, and … let’s be frank. We’ve got better heroes for our time than Holden Caulfield could be. Studying Holden is like studying our parents.
Now, I haven’t read Catcher in the Rye in about five years, but I don’t think the fact that it’s a bit pathetic to the modern observer makes it completely obsolete. Wes Anderson has a whole career in making films — good ones — that are all basically about variations on Holden Caulfield.
Right. So what do you think? Talk amongst yourselves. Oh, and while you’re reading that article, tell me who you think today’s Holdens are? We’re not really stuck with Harry Potter, are we? I’ve got some more interesting characters in mind.
