I think it's interesting that Catcher In The Rye is so often challenged for it's content. It seems that not too often books are challenged like that, but what's even more intriguing is it's apparent influence on some people to commit murder. This blog will try to socially/phsychologically analyze the people who commited these crimes and why they had such strong ties to the book.
First, and most likely most popular, is Mark David Chapman's 1980 murder of John Lennon. It is important to understand the mental stability in this person's brain in order to comprehend where he is coming from. Chapman was diagnosed at a young age with a rare, yet severe form of autism. His father, an Air Force general, was physically abusive to both him and his mother, and furthermore, and possibly the most disturbing, is that he fantasized about having a god-like power over a group of "little people," not specifying what this exactly means. It should also be noted that Chapman was experimenting with hard drugs by age fourteen, ran away from home often, and was the subject of much teasing. After noting all of these factors it's difficult to determine whether or not Catcher In The Rye had a monumental influence on his instability. It appears as if this was just one of his strange obsessions. He was most interested in Holden's hostile stance against "phoniness." Some think that he was fed up with John Lennon being a "phony."
Another murder committed by a die-hard fan of Catcher is John Hickley Jr., best known for an assasination attempt against Ronald Reagan. This is another case of someone very mentally unstable who just happened to be obsessed by this book. He said that he shot the president in order to get the attention of actress Jodie Foster, whom he had become obsessed with after seeing her in the film Taxi Driver. He felt that this was the only way to gain her attention. He was later found not guilty by reasons of insanity.
And so, we are left to make a conclusion here. Does reader Catcher automatically make you a murderer? No. Is there a discomforting amount of mentally unstable people who became obsessed with the book and forced them to commit murder? Oddly, yes. However, this is not enough reason to think that banning the book in places will limit violence.
People did creepy stuff because of this book. No doubt about it. I don't think J.D Salinger meant for his book to influence violence. Catcher in the Rye doesn't make you a murderer. I'm glad public schools teach this book. I'm also glad my class hasn't killed me. Win Win.
ReplyDeleteNot to mention, people are suggesting that The Catcher is making everyone into murderers, yet there are only two really famous cases: the Chapman and John Hinckley, Jr. incidents. I'd be willing to bet that there are many other factors that could have moved other people to commit murder, and on a greater scale. Some just choose to blame The Catcher because of the "controversial" nature it was already notorious for. The only thing that singling out The Catcher as the reason for the imbalance in these men has done is to take away from the greatness of the writing of J.D. Salinger.
ReplyDeleteSee to me this book is just like a video game or action film. It shows people there is a different way of seeing things, and a different way of dealing with things. The only time that these things make people change their ways to conform to them, is when the person themselves has already accepted that they want to change in the first place. This essentially means that any person can chose to base their actions on a famous work, but it's not the work that really makes them do it. They've already long accepted the premise of their actions before choosing how to do it.
ReplyDeleteCool post, Johnny-- nice research.
ReplyDelete