J.D. Salinger’s The Catcher in the Rye is one of the most well-known, well-regarded and most controversial books in American literature, and for good reason. Salinger’s tale of disaffected teenager Holden Caulfield, and his quest to belong and find his place in a world he thinks is phony, has been a subject of discussion and debate ever since its publication. In many instances, schools and educational organizations have censored or banned the book due to its lascivious content, its unsympathetic main character, and the general amorality of the book’s surface details. To that end, The Catcher in the Rye has been at the center of the endless and complex discussion regarding the validity of censorship in education and literature; people on both sides of the argument battle over whether the messages and content in The Catcher in the Rye is appropriate or useful for schoolchildren. Despite the objectionable content at the surface of the character’s actions, Salinger’s novel has an importance and a morality that transcends Holden’s rebellious behavior, and should instead discourage censorship of the book.
The censorship and banning of books is a long-standing practice among civilizations ever since the creation of movable type – in one society or another, literature and works of art are created that go against the grain of normal societal conventions. “School districts from New York to Texas have been attacked for using such works as Joseph Heller’s Catch 22, Piri Thomas’ Down These Mean Streetsand even Anne Frank’s Diary of a Young Girl” (Edwards 39). In essence, censorship and book bans occur when a large group of people (typically concerned parents of students who might be reading the book in class) pressure a school or educational body to censor or ban a book in order to protect their children from objectionable content perceived to be in the book. The overall premise behind book banning is that the book is thought to have no redeeming content, thus making it unworthy of inclusion in an educational curriculum. The objectionable content can consist of anything from sexual overtones to harsh language, and even unpopular political beliefs (e.g. a religious or non-religious perspective, Communism/Marxism) that the school’s faculty or neighborhood parents find offensive. The book or books in question are then put on lists of books that are not to be taught in the relevant area, whether it is just one school or entire states or nations.
The history of book banning in schools has roots in the 1960s, where a Tulsa teacher was fired for having the book in a class assignment; the prosperity of the 1980s and the restructuring of the school system may have also played a factor, as greater focus on political correctness caused many books to be restricted based on morality. There is even an insidious ripple effect that occurs when books are censored – in a culture that encourages censorship and brings trouble to those who do not censor, this leads teachers to self-censor as well (Noll 1994, p. 59). Those who wish to examine the issue of censorship in literature must define morality as it pertains to educators picking classroom works: “We should choose a mature and responsible definition, one tested by time, and actively defend the books we select for classroom reading as moral works” (Edwards 40). The values of fiction must be firmly established in the freedom of people to read it: “Most censors want to preserve some form of society in which they can exercise their own freedom; we can argue, following Mill and many others, that the kind of society the censor really wants cannot be maintained if his kind of censorship prevails” (Booth, p. 155).
Catcher is said to be “still heading the list of favorite books to be censored” (Edwards, p. 39). The book has become the poster child for censored works of classic literature: “Catcher has become a symbol for critics of what they perceive to be a vile, ungodly plot on the part of schools to undermine the morals of American school children” (p. 39). The cries of immorality by the book’s critics are thought by its defenders as insubstantial and almost silly: “One does not have to read the book. Just flip a few pages and the offending words and passages can be easily spotted” (p. 39). Catcher was censored for various uses of profanity and sexual references, and for general ‘immorality,’ but critics were using as a blanket statement to censor books with objectionable content. Life in contemporaneous America was one of moral backlash and political correctness, where children were not meant to be exposed to things that would make them less moral individuals.
The social and cultural roots of the banning of Salinger’s novel lie in the emphasis on conservative ‘family values,’ which instill codes for good behavior in young children that are rebelled against by Holden Caulfield in The Catcher in the Rye. The teenager’s malaise and lack of respect for authority is cited as a reason why teenagers should not be taught the book, as it would encourage bad behavior by their kids. Holden himself is cited as an immoral figure whose behaviors lie outside the norm of mainstream Christian morality, which is the basis for 20th –century American ethics and virtues. The prevalence of sex and drugs in the book also gives parents pause.
Despite these objections, however, The Catcher in the Rye remains an essentially moral and important book, showing the malaise of postwar teenagers and the alienation they feel from each other. Holden Caulfield swears and drinks and smokes because he sees other people doing it, and attempts to belong in a world that is constantly terrible to him. Holden is cited as an “indifferent [American] Adam who finds himself alone in an indifferent, and oftentimes hostile, environment” (Steinle, p. 20). To that end, Holden must react by being mean right back to it; he does not fit in school, so he causes trouble and is kicked out. He does not fit in anywhere in New York City, so he struggles to reconnect with his few old friends and teachers. In the end, he finds little to comfort him, and ends up in a rest home in order to recover from his harrowing experience. His hospitalization alone cements the fact that Holden is not meant to be emulated, but censors still took umbrage to his journey being depicted in the first place, leading them to ban the book (Edwards, 1983).
Furthermore, Edwards (1983) refutes the assertion that The Catcher in the Rye is an ‘immoral’ book, taking a Christian perspective to show the events and characters in it are ultimately moral. “Whether one takes as a basis for morality the teachings of Jesus, the documents of our democracy, Kohlberg’s levels of moral reasoning, or some other source, Holden Caulfield emerges as a confused but moral person” (Edwards, p. 42). While Holden has many immoral and rebellious traits, he still has basic respect for his elders; he fears the lecturing his relatives will give him about his poor performance in school, and still goes to see his old teacher Mr. Spencer, even though old men have “bumpy old chests” and legs that are “so white and unhairy,” out of respect (Salinger, Ch. 2). This is evidence of moral behavior, and Holden also cares about many more people, including the often-scorned schoolmate Ackley, whom he invites to the movies and always accepts despite still irritating him (Edwards, p. 40). He believes in justice for other spurned classmates, including the child who was harassed to the point of suicide. Holden also shows great love and respect for his parents, as well as his sister Phoebe: “You never saw a little kid so pretty and smart in your whole life” (Salinger, Ch. 10). Holden himself is humble to the point of self-hatred, nonetheless displaying a great level of care for other people.
One of Holden’s biggest character flaws is, perhaps, being too discerning about the people he holds in high esteem. Holden hates hypocrisy; calling people “phony” is a bit of a mantra with him. This may seem to be evidence of the kind of bossy, nihilistic character who should not be teaching kids to be as rebellious as he is, but his heart is in the right place. The boy’s biggest flaw is that he does not know how to express it or temper it; this leads him to the kind of trouble that turns him into a teenage rebel. The moment when he sees the words “FUCK YOU” scrawled on the wall of Phoebe’s school and rubs it off is perhaps a microcosm of The Catcher in the Rye’s controversial nature; while the book contains such profanities, it does not celebrate them, and instead shows a character who, despite his flaws, wants to do the right thing (like erasing the bad word from his sister’s home to protect her) (Edwards, p. 42).
When examining the potential to censor or ban a book, the purpose or effect of that censorship must be found. In the case of censoring a book in schools, the differences between how an adult would read the book and the perspective of a teenager can be an important distinction to make. There are substantial differences between the reactions of adults and teenagers when reading The Catcher in the Rye. The tale of a disaffected teenager desperately trying to find his place in the world, while also bucking authority at every turn, reads as different things to different generations. This, perhaps, might be at the crux of the argument regarding censorship and banning of the book; adults either do not understand the book’s message or believes it glorifies Holden’s behavior, while teenagers may find Holden’s lack of identity and adolescent confusion relatable.
When teenagers read The Catcher in the Rye, they may find a kindred spirit in Holden. Teenagers are naturally entering a rebellious phase in their lives, where they seek to set themselves apart from the norm and find out who they really are. They have enough agency to disagree vehemently with the orders of their elders, and have reasons why; they are beginning to understand the world while not having a full understanding of how it works. This is Holden in a nutshell; a lost boy, doing what he wants, challenging authority and doing things that teenagers may only dream of. Teenage rebellion is an attractive prospect to a teenager, and so Holden might be able to vicariously do the things they want to do themselves. Holden’s feeling of distance from the world around him, and his feeling that he is special, resonates with many teenagers who desperately want to set themselves apart.
Meanwhile, when an adult reads The Catcher in the Rye, they may have one of two major readings from the book. Holden is no longer a romantic figure, but a tragic one; constantly alienated from other people, constantly lost and fooling himself into thinking he is unique, he is actually quite sad in his way. Holden engages in objectionable behavior merely in order to feel something, since his life is terrible enough that he must do terrible things to be alive. Other adults, however, may actually hate Holden as opposed to feeling sorry for him; he is the rebellious child they would never want to have, or would dread having. He would never listen to a thing they say, he doesn’t quite understand the ways of the world but pretends he does, and does not respect authority. Because of that, adults have no control over Holden.
The difference between adults accepting the book and feeling threatened by the book depends on their perspective on the book’s usefulness. Adults may believe that teenagers should be shown Holden’s story, to show them that everyone feels alienated, but that will pass in time and you should recognize its negative aspects. However, others may simply want to nip any rebellion in the bud, and not show teenagers exactly how to do it. The thought is that, if they are not shown drinking, smoking, swearing and sex, they will not want to do it. Depending on what your perspective is, The Catcher in the Rye shows the destructive or the attractive side of danger, as teenagers may find themselves in Holden Caulfield, while adults see him as a cautionary tale (or one to simply avoid).
In conclusion, The Catcher in the Rye is a book that has been unfairly censored and banned over its history. Despite Salinger’s trenchant prose, fantastically realized characters, and controversial statements about the nature of adolescence and alienation, the book has been banned because of the main character’s rebellious behavior. The purpose of censorship of the book was to keep children away from what parents saw as a poor role model; a rebellious, alienated teenager who swears, fights, drinks, smokes and – most of all – disobeys authority at every turn. While the overall message of the book is that these adolescent rebellions are a phase that will pass, and that Holden’s personality problems cause him great distress and unhappiness, the censorship of The Catcher in the Rye rests merely on the notion that Holden Caulfield is a bad influence on those who read about him. Literary scholars, however, have refuted this notion, citing the novel as both implicitly moral and a cautionary tale for postwar American teens who are trying to find their place in the world.
References
Booth, W.C. (1964 Mar). Censorship and the Values of Fiction. The English Journal 53(3): 155-
164.
Edwards, J. (1983 Apr). Censorship in the Schools: What’s Moral about ‘The Catcher in the
Rye’? The English Journal 72(4) (Apr. 1983): 39-42.
Noll, E (1994 Dec). The Ripple Effect of Censorship: Silencing in the Classroom. English
Salinger, J.D. (1951). The catcher in the rye. Little, Brown & Company.
Steinle, P.H. (2009). The Catcher in the Rye as Postwar American Fable. J.D. Salinger’s The
Catcher in the Rye: Bloom’s Modern Critical Interpretations. Infobase Publishing: 89-103.
