I read "The Catcher in the Rye" a few months ago and after looking something in it up online I found that it had been banned in the US several times for being "anti-christian". Can anyone explain why it was banned? I can't see anything wrong with it.
2006-12-04
01:50:45
·
10 answers
·
asked by
Anonymous
in
Society & Culture
➔ Religion & Spirituality
Forgot to mention, it's by J.D. Salinger.
2006-12-04
01:51:08 ·
update #1
Betty Boop: Yeah that's a really good reason to ban a book.
2006-12-04
01:55:31 ·
update #2
Gary - well that's not the question.
Stephen, it was banned, it isn't anymore.
2006-12-04
01:56:21 ·
update #3
There is a strong bias in this country for religion and anything that slights it at all is probably on someone's "banned" list. People are overly sensitive to words, too. They can't get past the mere presence of a "swear" word to understand the meaning behind it. And, of course, anything that portrays sex as anything but a means to make more Christians is looked down upon by the church.
According to wikipedia.org
"The Catcher in the Rye is a novel by J. D. Salinger. First published in the United States in 1951, the novel remains controversial to this day due to its liberal profanity and portrayal of sexuality and teenage angst; it was the thirteenth most frequently challenged book of the 1990s, according to the American Library Association."
2006-12-04 01:55:17
·
answer #1
·
answered by nondescript 7
·
2⤊
1⤋
The Catcher and the Rye has been a controversial book that has been the subject of numerous book banning efforts. It is mainly due to what adults see as bad moral influence on young people since the character is an anti-social adolescent who engages in behavior banners are afraid their children will be influenced to engage in by reading the book. The book also uses a lot of profanity in the characters dialog.
To Gary--who ever told you the Bible was banned from schools? You got some bad info. there. Children are allowed to bring their own Bibles and pray whenever they wish even so long as they aren't interrupting instructional time.
As for book banning. I think it is deplorable. If your child is so weak minded they are going to turn into a juvenile delinquent from reading a book then you have a real problem and it wasn't caused by the book. Maybe if you spent their childhood teaching them to think critically and independently rather than to swallow whatever slop one book over another handed out you wouldn't have to be so scared. The book to me would be a good parenting opportunity to discuss why some of the actions were inappropriate coping mechanisms, why the character was experiencing such social isolation, and what more appropriate ways of responding might be. That is what parenting is all about, not excluding ideas. I think that the "Catcher in the Rye" points out some important social insights and feelings that many adolescents experience in some degree or another. Discussing it in a meaningful way and analyzing it can lead to a more fruitful interpretation of these feelings and personal growth.
2006-12-04 10:10:31
·
answer #2
·
answered by Zen Pirate 6
·
0⤊
0⤋
I agree with you. The book should never have been banned even though it was in many states. The real reason behind this action was due to the Christian Profanity Police. The word "*****" was mentioned and that was more than enough to raise the ire of fundamentalists. They didn't want their children to read a book that had that word in it, no matter the subject matter, or how good the writing might be.
Notice how you can't write the word here? Same thing. The word is considered offensive in any context. Sad when you consider your First Amendment Rights.
2006-12-04 09:58:58
·
answer #3
·
answered by gjstoryteller 5
·
1⤊
0⤋
The "Catcher in the Rye" The Catcher in the Rye has been shrouded in controversy since its publication. Reasons for banning have been the use of offensive language, premarital sex, alcohol abuse, and prostitution.
Mark David Chapman, murderer of musician John Lennon, was carrying the book when he was arrested immediately after the murder and referred to it in his statement to police shortly thereafter.[3] John Hinckley, Jr., who attempted to assassinate President Ronald Reagan in 1981, was also reported to have been obsessed with the book. Kurt Cobain also was carrying a copy of the book in addition to wearing a red hunting cap in the few weeks prior to his death.[4]
Critics see Holden has a disturbing influence on youths they consider to be "social outcasts." Holden is portrayed as a juvenile who rejects and is rejected by many peers and individuals. People like Chapman and Hinckley come to relate themselves to Holden, the person that nobody understands and that can't understand anybody else.
2006-12-04 09:57:10
·
answer #4
·
answered by Dr. D 7
·
7⤊
0⤋
The guys who shot Lennon, Reagan, and Kurt Cobain, all drank milk as children. We should ban "Catcher in the Rye" and Milk as bad influences on society.
2006-12-04 10:20:53
·
answer #5
·
answered by iknowtruthismine 7
·
1⤊
0⤋
Haha-I wrote about that book for a book report - after reading one guys answer there - he said that the guy who killed John Lennon read it ,The guy who tryed to assainate Ronald Regan read it and so did Kurt Cobain -I really liked that book -oh Dear I think Im evil...
2006-12-04 10:04:59
·
answer #6
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
I didn't know it was banned , I bought a copy a few years ago.
2006-12-04 09:54:13
·
answer #7
·
answered by srstephens 4
·
0⤊
1⤋
I couldn't get past the first chapter because of the filthy language. Maybe enough people found that offensive for it to be banned. Not really sure. My personal opinion.
2006-12-04 09:55:56
·
answer #8
·
answered by lostinmissouri 1
·
3⤊
3⤋
I'd be more interested in the question: "Why is the Bible banned in almost all Muslim countries and IN AMRICAN SCHOOLS?
2006-12-04 09:54:07
·
answer #9
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
4⤋
It was just a stupid story. Only idiots liked it. It should have been burned along with all bibles then every one would have been better off having never known them. Puppy ha ha ha ha ha ha ha xx
2006-12-04 09:53:40
·
answer #10
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
7⤋