...Or do people over-analyze Catcher in the Rye?

It just seems to me that people relate this book from everything from Communism to Jesus, and I just can't see it. I just see the book as a teen's cynincal view of the world around him, albiet from a rather depressed point of view.

Not everything has to represent something in literature, and I'm sick of my teachers and classmates expecting me to see how the Raven in Poe's poem represents the downfall of western civilization.

*sigh*

Yeah, I agree that some of the analogies we made in English always seemed a bit far-fetched. I'm glad I don't ever have to take an English class again. Good riddance.

Never had to read it.

I'm mainly talking about literary analysis in general, but I am using it in the pretense of this book.

I read that book in High School. I consider it to be one of my most favorite books. Reason why because I sorta share his cynical view of the world (although less now then back when I read the story). I also like the style in which it was written.

As for over-analyzing stories, I think that is pretty true to a degree, considering that we simply just "guessing" as to what the symbols mean. I wouldn't be surprised if a lot of the commonly accepted explainations of symbols aren't even what the author had intended. If we really wanted to know what the author is trying to symbolize, why not just ASK him/her?

And aren't half of the things you analyize already known to everyone already anyway? I mean, 90% of people in the US probably read this book in high school and come up with the same metaphors year after year after year.

There are two things to keep in mind. One, there was a literary style popular in and around the 1800's called Symbolism, and a lot of American literature one reads falls into it. Two, authors DO like to throw in multiple/hidden themes, meanings, etc. behind the stuff they write. I do agree though, some things in literature ARE over-analyzed, and I'm not a big fan of American literature.

I remember reading Lord of the Flies back in high school, and we had to analyze the hell out of it... there is so much symbolism in that book that it is almost too blatant to be called symbolism.... but the best part is, when they interviewed the author, he denied that it was supposed to be symbolic of anything.

I think they do that often. Not because it's true but because everybody should be able have his own opinion about the book. Quite like with paintings. The art is best when you use your own imagination, not some "official explanation" of it.

Besides, the authors may very well have symbolic stuff in that they didn't plan. They are, as people, just products of their surrounding environment and society like everyone else. If they are critical of it, or support it, no doubt they will write in many things without really thinking about it.

See, this is why I enjoy things on face value.

Well, this and because I too bright durnit.

My favorite over-analyzation of a book--pitting Gatsby as Jesus. Seriously, if he WAS meant to be Jesus...it was just a crappily done allusion by Fitzgerald.

"Classic" American literature, excepting Edgar Allan Poe, should be burned.

Like Hawthorne?

All of it.

I concur with lassev. I think art and literature means different things to different people. I think of it like some sad song. Everyone things of their own experiences when they hear it.

I love how in the introduction to Ender's Game Card says that he wasn't thinking of any particular symbolism when he wrote the book.

Ok, well first it was Marxism, not communism.

I agree with you somewhat, some things are overanalyzed, but other things really do have levels upon levels upon levels of meaning. Look at 1984, or Lord of the Flies.