maybe it was because i didn't read it until i was in my mid-20s (or the fact that i'm a bitter, spiteful, jerk), but i loathe 'the catcher in the rye.'  i think holden caulfield is one of literature's most unsympathetic characters and beyond that, a total hoebag.

wasnt holden a huge middle class tosser himself? thats what i got out of the book.....

i dunno. i found him incredibly unsympathetic as well.

It always seems that when people critisise Catcher in the Rye it's always about HC being a bit of a knob/unsympathetic. Why should you have to sympathise with/like the main character in a book in order to enjoy it?

many good and even great books have unsympathetic characters. but they are  interesting. or provocative. or at very least entertaining.  holden did not interest me at all. the world is full of whiny, conflicted rich kids. perhaps by the time i read the book in 2000 or therabouts the holden archetype had sunk so deeply into the culture/ethos/whatever of literate/semi-educated america that it no longer held anything to interest me. i dont know. but i found the book annoying at best. perhaps if i had been forced to read it at 16 i would feel differently, but we had the option of reading the book or watching "a streetcar named desire". the good kids chose to read it so they could learn about masturbation, my friends and i had hangovers,dozed off while a bad movie played,and missed a life-changing literary experience, i suppose.