Jessica Virgin

Professor Kilpatrick

English 2260

“A Cultural and Historical Look on the Banned Book Catcher in the Rye”

The Catcher in the Rye has been a hot topic of debate for quite some time in this country,

and many have argued both the pros and cons of why this book should or shouldn’t be in

American schools. The novel came out in the 1950’s and has been disputed for and against

starting as early as the 60’s all the way through the late 2000’s. This goes to show that even as

the years pass and cultures change, the themes and challenges this book continues to present

remain uncomfortable to talk about and are shunned by parents and school boards alike. The

Catcher in the Rye is such a trouble-maker in America because of its bold, confrontational, and

somewhat ungracious approach to the struggles of youth and the fall between innocence and

reality. Looking at this novel through a historical and cultural perspective, we see how many

people it has offended, misrepresented, and shamed, making this book inadequate for the school

systems. It should be removed from schools because it does not provide teens with the right

education and preparation they need to face the new world with an encouraging eye.

A cultural and historical approach to this book will let us see why there has been so much

debate for The Catcher in the Rye because we’ll be able to see what was going on at the time that

contributed to the hate or praise it received. While most of the arguments against it remain the

same for its inappropriate content, there seems to be different major themes throughout the

decades for why it’s not sufficient for schools that correlates with the morals/politics of the time.

The Catcher in the Rye is an interesting book to read for teens because there’s so many

metaphors they can dive into and learn from. However, the book is filled with depressive angst
as the rich, young Holden, the main character and narrator, tries to connect to the world and

people around him with a hard shell of cynicism around him. The death of his younger brother

hindered him from maturing into adulthood and he isolated himself from everything “phony.” He

idolized childhood and the simpleness it held for him. His wish was to save the innocent from

jumping off the edge of the rye field (childhood) and keep them safe frover from things like sex,

consequences, and the harsh realities of the world; all things that Holden struggles greatly with,

thus creating the title for the book. He tries to have sex, go on dates with girls, connect with

adults, but each forces him to confront his greatest fears and Holden ends up pushing each away.

The only person Holden feels a connection to is a girl from his childhood, Jane and his young

sister, Phoebe. This lack of connection makes Holden very lonely, even if he won’t admit it

because of his sinister view of the world and people, but he craves it more than anything. This

causes his restless, manic behavior and scares off any potential friend or mentor he could have,

although many teachers and girls try. After getting kicked out of school and wandering around

New York for a couple of days he eventually has a breakthrough with his brother’s death and his

little sister convinces him to stay. This is the first time Holden realizes his actions have

consequences, and he learns to value the people around him. His soul finds a bit of peace and he

makes plans to return to school and apply himself. Although, we never find out if he’ll make

good on his plans because the book starts and ends with him telling his story in a rest home.

A cultural and historical approach to this book will let us see why there has been so much

debate for The Catcher in the Rye because we’ll be able to see what was going on at the time that

contributed to the hate or praise it received. While most of the arguments against it remain the

same for its inappropriate content, there seems to be different major themes throughout the

decades for why it’s not sufficient for schools that correlates with the morals/politics of the time.
For instance, in Morris, Manitoba, it was removed because “excess vulgar language, sexual

scenes, things concerning moral issues, excessive violence, and anything dealing with the

occult,”(Banned & Challenged Books, 9). In 1975 the parents of Selinsgrove, Pennsylvania had

it illegally removed with a skewed vote because they hated it so much, during the year 1989 it

was removed in Boron, California for its profanity, and the list goes on which I’ll delve into later.

The big question of debate though, with this book and so many others, is who should have the

right to determine what children get taught in school? The students? Or the teachers? On one

hand, it’s a parents right to both shield and expose their kid to whatever worldly things they like

such as language and sexuality. But on the other hand, it’s a teacher's responsibility to educate

kids about the real world around them and the human experience. Catcher in the Rye, does both

of these things, which begs the new question, is it worth it?

Suzanne Kauer, a teacher educator, wrote an article titled, “A Battle Reconsidered:

Second Thoughts on Book Censorship and Conservative Parents,” which talks about this book

and this question specifically. At first, Kauer hated the idea of controlled censorship and believed

that every individual reader has the right to decide what they do and don’t want to consume.

Though as the years passed, she realized that while this is true, in middle and high school,

parents do get a say as to what their kids should and shouldn’t read because they too are a part of

their child’s education. There is a duality in what kids will and won’t consume because as she

points out, “Students will access this stuff even if their parents disapprove, they need exposure to

“real” life, and so on. The only problem is that some of these topics - such as adolescent sexual

experimentaion and subsatnce use or abuse- simply are not real life to every teen,”(Kauer,2). Just

because teen angst, drug and alcohol use, and the crippling struggles of sexuality are a part of a

lot of teens' lives, doesn’t mean that all students will relate to books like these.
 Kauer goes on to describe her experience with a certain parent who didn’t want her child

reading Catcher in the Rye because it’s so dark and she couldn’t understand why the books her

children reads in school had to be so gloomy, why couldn’t they reading uplifting and

encouraging novels that expresses her kind of worldview? This is when she realizes that, “Would

a speech from a teacher justifying the merits of his or her curriculum help Hispanic American

parents feel better about their children’s reading only works by dead, white males? Then why do

I feel it would help in the case of conservative, religious parents?”(Kauer, 2). Kauer’s point here

is that books shouldn’t necessarily be exclusively about their religion or class, how would they

learn if every book a kid wrote was based on their life? However, if a student is never

represented in literature, if their morals, culture and way of life never make their way into the

classroom, students will feel as if Literature isn’t for them. That’s why it is Kauer’s opinion that

we should be listening to ALL the voices of those who have a stake in educating students and we

should encourage every student to make their opinions about literature without judgment if they

choose that a book isn’t for them.

What makes this book good for students is that a lot of teens have problems adapting to

adulthood as Holden does, and it can cause great suffering and alienation from friends and

family. It’s supposed to teach kids that although the world can be ugly, “fuck you” can be

scrawled on almost anything and prostitutes and their pimps ocupy corners all over the globe, it

can also be beautiful. The first time Holden feels happy in the book is when he decides not to

leave for his little sister and he takes her to the carousel. Watching this moment and being a part

of such a sweet, happy memory makes him obscenely happy and it starts to break down the

layers of emotional walls Holden has put up to protect himself from becoming fake. However,

while this is a valuable lesson for a lot of teenagers, the question we must again ask ourselves is
strong language, violence, use of prostitiuion, and manic behavior the right way to teach this

lesson? Is there a better example of this in another form of Literature?

As stated before, many parents have said no, it is absolutely not appropriate for students

to read, and there are better and nicer ways to ease kids into adulthood. The book has been

challenged over 30 times in the span of roughly 50 years, almost immediately after it came out.

That’s half a century it’s been disputed about, which isn’t a lot compared to other books that have

been pushed out of the education system despite them being “classics,” but this leaves a lot of

time and history for cultures to change.

In 2001, the time of 9/11, it was challenged and removed twice in South Carolina and

Georgia, one reason because it was simply “a filthy, filthy book” due to its promiscuous themes

and rigid profanity. In 1963, the time of Martin Luther King, it was banned in Ohio because the

book was actually found to be “anit-white.” It’s a funny coincidence that this book was banned at

almost exactly the same time as the civil rights movement started in 1968 and ended in 2008,

when the movement too died down. There’s few morals and points of view that we don’t see

challenged for the white, convservative (and racist) Christians we see that dominated the 50’s to

the early 2000’s.

However, we know that since the 50’s a lot of Americans have also become less

conservative, and more marginalized peoples have come forward to fight for rights throughout

the years. This book was challenged in Waterloo, Iowa and Duval County, Florida in 1992

because of “Profanity, lurid passages about sex, and statements defamatory to minorities, God,

women, and the disabled,” (Banned & Challenged Books, 17). So should this book be banned

because it offends the white, upper class people? Or should it be banned because it only

represents a rich, white male, puts down minorities and doesn't represent them correctly? There
seems to be two opposite battles going on for why it should be banned based on the time and

what was happening in American culture. Which begs the question, is this book banned because

of its racism, classism, and “dealings with the occult,” or is it simply the culture of the dominated

time?

Some say that all of that is worth it though, that even though it’s offensive and the

reasons stated above for banning it is worth the message because we need to know what it was

like for people in that time and we can learn the valuable, timeless lesson that Holden learns.

However, even though it can teach us these things, there are other sources that educate students

about these issues without making the parents riot to the school board. It’s not bad to learn that

prostitutes exist, but should we be encouraging young boys that if you’re struggling with

sex/losing your virginity then you should just hire a sex worker and get it over with? Teens also

need to know how minorities were treated in the past, yes, but there are better, more accurate,

and more modern books that do the same thing like Brown Girl Dreaming by Jacqueline

Woodson or The Hate U Give by Angie Thomas. Everything that Holden goes through can help

students, but those students are few and far inbetween.

Overall, I think this book is offensive in more ways than one, to more than one kind of

people. It offends both the rich and the poor, the white and the black, the male and the female. It

might be great for a young, white, rich boy to read who is struggling to fight self-alienation and

lack of emotional connection, but who else is it good for? When it really comes down to it, the

“F” word may not be the problem, it’s the fact that it paints different cultures in only one kind of

way, which is why I think it should be banned. Although I believe in the freedom to read as

much as Kauer, and I think that a lot of teens dealing with isolation and sexuality can learn from

Holden, there are less offensive books that can do the same thing that represent people, and
history, in a better light. So should teens read this book if they want to and could teachers

recommend students to read this book, on their own time, if they think they can gain something

from this novel and its more mature lessons? Absolutely, I think they should. But for it to be a

staple in school systems is not necessary for students to learn how to connect to the world around

them and become responsible adults, and it’s caused more harm than good throughout the years.

Banning books is a dangerous and slippery slope because it determines and polices what

is deemed Literature in our schools. Sometimes it is wise to remove certain books because of

their offensive nature as time changes and we become more aware of racism, classism, and

sexism that is prevalent in a lot of American classics, which is why the most important thing to

remember when banning books is to ask why? Are we doing it to protect students? Are we doing

it to appease parents who don’t think kids should be reading about sex? Or are we trying to

create an environment for students to effectively educate themselves about the real world, how to

navigate it, and become well-adjusted adults? There is no way around the harsh truth of the

world, there is no catcher to save children from falling from the rye field, so it’s up to each of us

to be aware of how we are educating teens about it so that they can gracefully and confidently

deal with what the world has to offer them, which sometimes means getting rid of the old, and

introducing new ways that will better influence the upcoming generations. The Catcher in the

Rye is an American classic and has many great lessons that can be learned for adolescents, but as

we looks at it from a cultural and historical perspective, there are many problems that arise and

motifs that parents and students alike have the right to deny because of the offensive and

marginalized ideals it presents.

 Works Cited

Admin. “Banned & Challenged Classics.” Advocacy, Legislation & Issues, 23 Apr. 2021,

https://www.ala.org/advocacy/bbooks/frequentlychallengedbooks/classics.

Kauer, Suzanne M. “https://www.jstor.org/stable/30046832” JSTOR, The English Journal,

Jan. 2008, http://www.jstor.org.libprox1.slcc.edu/stable/.

Salinger, J. D. The Catcher in the Rye. Bantam Books, 1966.