Degree Project
Level: Bachelor’s
Competition and Authenticity in J. D. Salinger’s The Catcher in the Rye
Author: Thomas Edholm Supervisor: Dr Billy Gray
Examiner: Dr Carmen Zamorano Llena
Subject/main field of study: English (Literature) Course code: EN2028
Credits: 15 ECTS
Date of examination: 4 June 2021
At Dalarna University it is possible to publish the student thesis in full text in DiVA.
The publishing is open access, which means the work will be freely accessible to read and download on the internet. This will significantly increase the dissemination and visibility of the student thesis.
Open access is becoming the standard route for spreading scientific and academic information on the internet. Dalarna University recommends that both researchers as well as students publish their work open access.
I give my/we give our consent for full text publishing (freely accessible on the internet, open access):
Yes ☒ No ☐
Dalarna University – SE-791 88 Falun – Phone +4623-77 80 00
Table of Contents
Introduction ... 1
The Concept of Authenticity ... 4
Rousseau on Competition and Authenticity ... 6
Holden’s Resistance to Competition ... 7
Holden’s View on Authenticity ... 13
The Consequences for Holden ... 22
Conclusion ... 26
Introduction
J. D. Salinger’s novel The Catcher in the Rye, published in 1951, tells the story of an adolescent at odds with the world. The novel explores issues such as what it means to be real and authentic and how people are affected by competition and inequality – issues which this thesis aims to discuss, against a philosophical background. The protagonist and narrator, Holden Caulfield, recounts the events during a few days leading up to the previous Christmas. As the story begins, 16-year-old Holden has just been expelled from his school, Pencey Prep, for failing most of his subjects. Throughout the novel, Holden interacts with various people, first at school and later in New York City. He frequently gives his opinion, often in critical terms, of people and social phenomena. Arriving in New York, where his parents live, he is reluctant to go home, since he does not want to tell them about his expulsion. He therefore checks in to a hotel and spends a few days drifting around the city, meeting with friends and strangers and frequenting venues for culture and entertainment. He eventually runs out of money and goes to see his younger sister. He tells her that his dream job is to be “the catcher in the rye”, by which he means an individual who is situated in a big field of rye bordering on a cliff, where he rescues children playing there from falling off the cliff. Later Holden takes his sister to the zoo, where she rides a carousel and Holden has a sort of epiphany. At the end of the narrative, Holden gets ill and ends up in a healthcare institution, from where he tells his story. Two salient themes in the novel are competition and authenticity. Holden opposes competition of various kinds, whether it be in the economic arena, in sports, in matters of love or a more general competition for superiority.
Moreover, Holden frequently complains about what is “phony”, insincere, false and inauthentic.
As Carol and Richard Ohmann explain, some critics claim that Holden’s problems are mainly located in himself, that he responds to inner pressures rather than outer, being a victim of his own “spiritual illness”. These critics describe him as “immature or spoiled ... too absolute
in his judgements, too intolerant of human failings ... a ‘snob’” (24). On the opposite side of the spectrum are interpretations which relate Holden’s problems more to “external causes” and which tend to “blame the world” (24). Studying the concepts of competition and authenticity in conjunction is significant, in that it allows a picture to emerge, where Holden displays a coherence, where his perspective on life and his actions go hand in hand. This coherent picture points to problematic features in Holden’s contemporary society, relating to competition and authenticity.
Previous research extensively investigates these two topics with regard to the novel.
Some authors focus largely on the theme of competition. Alex Pitofsky points out that Holden, even more than he despises phoniness, despises “masculine success”. His predicament proves to be difficult, given that the boarding-school culture at the time was very marked by competition and that he could hardly avoid “America’s culture of competition and success”
(68). Pitofsky further claims that Holden is “determined to shun every form of masculine competition” (79). Emphasizing the specific political context of the novel, Carol and Richard Ohmann observe that The Catcher in the Rye was published during the Korean war, and that this was a time when there was a clear opposition between socialism and capitalism (16-17).
They note that the novel mirrors “a competitive, acquisitive society” (19), and that Holden objects to the inequality of the class system, a difference that is “socially imposed” (31).
Highlighting a philosophical perspective, Guy Pinku emphasizes that Holden demonstrates a philosophical view, in both words and actions and that Holden has a “moral call” (77-78).
Holden sees society as a place where people try to show that they are superior to others (78), and he questions the prevailing economic inequality (80). On a somewhat different note, Yasuhiro Takeuchi links Holden’s perspective to Zen Buddhism and Zen Archery specifically, where the archer becomes the aimer as well as the aim (57). The value of taking aim is questioned more in general (55), and she claims that Holden is “beyond” taking aim (61).
Other authors focus largely on the theme of authenticity. Adam Kadlac observes that people being phony constitutes Holdens major problem, due to Holden’s “concern for authenticity” (792-793). Kadlac discusses the role of self-awareness and sincerity, which are both essential for authenticity (796). Don Fallis specifically brings up the difference between being phony and lying, where phoniness is more linked to behaviour than words (15). Phonies are inauthentic in that they deceive people “about who they are” (18). Benjamin Priest, while recognising Holden’s quest for the authentic, adopts a critical view on Holden’s uncompromising stance. He claims that Holden only faces “despair and defeat”, maintaining that there is “something wrong” with Holden (211). He observes how Holden values the
“authentic world of the child” (216) and that he has difficulty letting go of childhood (215).
As briefly illustrated above, previous research treats the topics of competition and authenticity from a variety of angles. These two notions can, in fact, be seen as intimately connected. Still, the link between these two concepts has not been analysed in detail with regard to The Catcher in the Rye. It would be useful in a research context to define the interconnectedness of these concepts more clearly, which is what this thesis will aim to do.
Against the background of this connection, Holden’s aversion to competition and inauthenticity can be seen as one logical whole, with a clear coherence between his words and actions. Even his expulsion from school and his reluctance to embrace adulthood may be seen as a logical consequence of his uncompetitive life philosophy, which has clear parallels to the philosophy of Jean-Jacques Rousseau and ideas prevalent during Romanticism, regarding the authentic subject. To facilitate the analysis, reference will therefore be made to the theories of Rousseau, who writes about the opposition between competition and authenticity. Particular reference will be made to his treatise A Discourse on Inequality. The analysis will highlight how Holden’s strong resistance to competition, in words and actions, is a logical consequence of his view on
authenticity. A similar logic is presented by Rousseau, in a more explicit manner, and his theories will be used to clarify the coherence of Holden’s perspective.
This thesis will first provide a theoretical account of the concept of authenticity from a philosophical perspective, followed by an account of Rousseau’s view on competition and authenticity and the opposition between these. Thereafter, against the background of previous research and theoretical aspects, The Catcher in the Rye will be analysed in three parts. The first part treats Holden’s resistance to competition, the second his view on authenticity and the third the practical consequences these views have for Holden.
The Concept of Authenticity
Charles Guignon simply states that “the ideal of authenticity is a project of becoming the person you are” (3). He quotes psychoanalyst Fritz Perls, who emphasises that one needs to break out of “the phoniness of game-playing”, in order to be authentic (4). This, however, is not an easy task, as society counteracts it, given that it works best when it turns people into “cogs in the machinery” (4-5). Authenticity, resting on the idea of a true self, requires two steps, as Guignon explains: Firstly, we need to connect to the real self within, and secondly, we need to express this real self to the world (6). Whereas the first step can be called self-knowledge or self- awareness, the other can be termed sincerity, and either one of these two can exist without the other. One can know oneself without expressing this to others. Conversely, people may believe that they express their true self in a sincere way, without actually knowing their true self.
Guignon further explains that this endeavour requires “total transparency of self to self” (8).
This indicates a certain doubleness in the self: in this transparency, one part of the self in some
way observes another part of the self, in a process where attention is turned inward, towards the self.
The concept of authenticity started to flourish as the Enlightenment, marked by scientific rationality, gave way to the Romantic era. As Guignon describes, it is characteristic for the scientific method that one isolates the properties which are essential to the thing, such as mass, velocity or position, where “only those properties of things that are quantifiable are regarded as really in the things” (31). However, these aspects may not provide the kind of meaning that constitutes a basis for human action, and in the absence of such meaning, it is hard to know what choices to make (44). Romanticism reacted against the Enlightenment’s separation of reason from feelings, holding that meaningfulness is given through the “inner resources that give us a sense of what is truly important” (50-51). The Romantic mind was convinced that truth “is discovered not by rational reflection and scientific method, but by a total immersion in one’s own deepest and most intense feelings” (51). Hence, the previous focus on reason was followed by a greater focus on feelings.
Childhood plays a special role in relation to the concept of authenticity. The German Romantic poet Friedrich Hölderlin, quoted by Guignon, describes the child’s divinity when it does not yet have the “chameleon colors of men”, and is not yet “at odds with itself” (53). The child is real and does not try to feign being what it is not, and it is not divided within itself, not against itself. Since Rousseau, the inner/outer distinction has been seen as parallel to the distinction child/adult, as Guignon explains. The inner self is childlike, characterised by spontaneity, “true” feelings and “intuitive understanding”. Conversely, the outer self is like the adult, hard, artificial and with feelings which are “muffled and deformed by playing socially approved games” (83). In this perspective, the childlike qualities of the inner self are valued, bringing a connection to what is true and an intuition that leads to understanding.
Guignon further explains that, during the Romantic period, art and creativity in the arts were glorified more than ever in Western culture (70). Art’s previous interest in pleasing an audience was, during this period, dropped (75-76). It was more about, as Guignon observes in connection to the Bohemian-Austrian poet and novelist Rainer Maria Rilke, turning inward and making “contact with the deep and primal source of all that is: Life, or Nature, or Being” (72).
The inner knowledge inherent in the authentic ideal could also be said to pertain “to a personal calling, to the voice of nature within, to the creative powers of one’s own imagination, or to one’s own deepest needs and capacities” (140).
Rousseau on Competition and Authenticity
In A Discourse on Inequality, Rousseau delineates how competition relates to authenticity. In the first sentence of the preface, he highlights the importance of the motto “Know Thyself”, inscribed on the Temple of Delphi in Athens (67). As mentioned, self-knowledge is indeed a prerequisite for being authentic. Rousseau goes on to sketch out a history of mankind, to find out what original qualities of the human being were of value in a primitive society and where the development has gone wrong. He points out that development has brought about a state where reason suffocates nature (70). Rousseau’s tenet is that man in his natural state is good, possessing compassion as a natural virtue (99). Pity, as a natural feeling, makes him unwilling to do evil, “independently of the maxims of education” (101). Society has developed from a state of equality into a state of inequality and oppression (105-106). As people started making comparisons, they acquired corresponding preferences. At this stage in history, people started to look at each other and began to prize public esteem: “He who sang or danced the best; he who was the most handsome, the strongest, the most adroit or the most eloquent became the most highly regarded, and this was the first step towards inequality” (114). People received
their rank based on certain qualities. The qualities of “intelligence, beauty, strength, skill, merit or talents” attracted consideration, and “it soon became necessary either to have them or to feign them. It was necessary in one’s own interest to seem to be other than one was in reality. Being and appearance became two entirely different things” (119). In order to have a high rank (in competition with others) it could be necessary to feign having certain qualities. In this scenario, man is not what he pretends to be, and thus inauthentic. Moreover, people wanted to enlarge their relative fortune “not so much from real need as to put oneself ahead of others”
(119). Men started competing in order to get ahead of each other. Rousseau specifically turns against comparison, claiming that inequality regarding influence or authority is inevitable when individuals are “forced to compare themselves with one another” (132).
Rousseau claims that the desire for reputation and honour “devours us all” as strengths and talents are compared. It turns “all men into competitors” (133). He clarifies that it is not the good in itself that is seen as attractive, but rather the relative advantage compared to the others – to be ahead of others in that respect. The powerful and rich “value the things they enjoy only to the extent that the others are deprived of them” (133). It is not to have them that is attractive but rather to be superior to others. The thing sought after is to be higher than others on some sort of scale, measuring for example wealth, power or prestige. This competition for relative rank creates artificial and unnatural people, the connection to the inner self is lost and people live “outside” themselves. Always “asking others what we are” and not ourselves creates “only façades, deceptive and frivolous” (135-136).
Holden’s Resistance to Competition
Holden expresses his resistance to competition in various ways throughout the novel. He opposes competition in the economic arena, competition in sports, competition in love and,
more generally, competition to gain superiority over others. His opposition to economic competition finds expression already at the start of the novel. His brother D.B. makes a considerable amount of money writing for the movies in Hollywood. Holden describes him as a “prostitute” (Salinger 2) for doing this, disapprovingly implying that D.B does this merely for the money. Holden has a tendency to link the acquisition of wealth to corrupt behaviour. He explains that his school had pupils from wealthy families and claims that it was full of “crooks”, and he adds that “the more expensive a school is, the more crooks it has” (4). He resents his boys’ school, where one only studies in order to “be able to buy a goddam Cadillac some day”
(141) – not a worthy objective for studies, in Holden’s view. He appears to have a general suspicion towards wealthy individuals, such as Mr Ossenburger, a financial benefactor of the school, who made a fortune as an undertaker. Holden suspects that Ossenburger probably just puts the corpses “in a sack and dumps them in the river” (17), which exemplifies how wealthy individuals, in Holden’s mind, tend to engage in corrupt behaviour.
Excessive competition in sports is something Holden equally objects to. As his school competes with another school, he observes that “you were supposed to commit suicide or something if old Pencey didn’t win” (2), criticising an exaggerated attitude to winning. He refers to the boys active in sports as “the athletic bastards” (45). At one point, Holden laments about “dopey guys ... that get sore and childish as hell if you beat them at golf, or even just some stupid game like ping-pong” (133). Although Holden may not dislike sports in general, he does not like it when it gets too competitive.
Holden also seems to avoid competition in love. He likes one girl more than any other and this is Jane Gallagher. They used to see each other a lot and Holden “held hands with her all the time” (86). Explaining his feelings when being with Jane, he simply states: “All you knew was, you were happy” (86). To his dismay, one evening his roommate Stradlater says that he will go on a date with Jane. On hearing this news, Holden “damn near dropped dead” (32).
He tells Stradlater: “I oughta go down and say hello to her” (32) and he repeats this statement three times. Still, he never gets around to doing it, since he was not “in the mood” – he adds:
“You have to be in the mood for those things” (34). Considering how dear Jane is to him, it could be expected that Holden would at least make some small effort to reach out to her. Instead, he backs out of this, potentially competitive, situation and does nothing. However, he is not happy. Every time he thinks of the two of them together, he feels like “jumping out the window”
(51).
Holden also objects to a more general competition for superiority. Stradlater wants to compete when it comes to appearance and esteem. According to Holden “he thought he was the handsomest guy in the Western Hemisphere” (28). Stradlater thinks he is handsomer than others and superior to them in that respect. Snobbishness is something Holden cannot stand. This also entails the attitude of being superior to others. Ernie, the piano player, is “a terrific snob and he won’t hardly even talk to you unless you’re a big shot or a celebrity or something” (87).
Sometimes Holden gets annoyed hearing Ernie perform, since it sounds as if he plays the piano like a snobbish person (87). Presumably, also in music he strives to be superior to others. When at the theatre, Holden dislikes how, during the intermission, everybody talks “about the play so that everybody could hear and know how sharp they were” (137). This kind of effort to try to gain esteem or superiority is something Holden reacts against and thinks of as phony.
Another aspect of Holden’s aversion to competition is that he prefers persons who do not try to compete, such as his friend Jane. When playing checkers, Jane does not move her kings, but just leaves them in the back row, since she likes the way it looks (33). This, admittedly, is not a way to compete seriously and win a game. The lack of competitiveness is also visible when Jane plays golf. Holden recounts how he “had a terrible time getting her to at least open her eyes when she took a swing at the ball” (84). His late younger brother Allie also did not seem to focus wholeheartedly on winning. When playing baseball, he wore a glove on
which he had written various poems, so that he could read them in the field (40). Holden prefers those who do not try to be superior to others, but rather the opposite, who accept an inferior position in some way. For example, his favourite character in the Bible, “next to Jesus, was that lunatic and all, that lived in the tombs and kept cutting himself with stones” (108). Such behaviour would hardly win him either esteem or a superior position. When asked by his sister Phoebe what he likes a lot, Holden thinks about the two nuns collecting money in “those beatup old straw baskets” (183) – accepting a modest way of life. He also thinks of the boy James Castle at his old school, who (rightly, according to Holden) called another boy, Phil Stabile, conceited and then refused to take it back, although he was severely abused by Stabile and his friends. Finally, instead of taking back what he said, he jumped out of the window and died (183-184). This is an example of someone who, instead of trying to gain esteem, remains honest, regardless of the consequences. Holden himself is not one for trying to impress other people but remains humble. He confesses to having a “lousy vocabulary” (9) and to sometimes acting as if he “was only about twelve” (10). Moreover, he claims that he is “a moron” (15), describes himself as “the only really dumb one” in his family (72) and confesses to having an “immature”
mind (159).
According to Pitofsky, Holden is averse to masculine competition specifically (79), which is a claim that can be challenged. At the time when the novel was written, as the labour market was less marked by equality between men and women, it could be a natural result that men tended to compete economically with men more than with women. In sports, as male and female competitors are often divided, competition against men would be the default option for Holden. Likewise, in matters of love, he would mainly be in competition with men. Moreover, the fact that Holden goes to a boys’ school would emphasise his competition with boys rather than girls. Nonetheless, also women can compete, and Holden appears to be averse to female competition as well. For example, he greatly appreciates Jane, and repeatedly describes how
Jane refrains from serious competition. Moreover, he particularly likes the two nuns, who refrain from economic competition. Ohmann also observes that the people Holden likes tend not to favour winning and competition, such as the nuns he meets, who are “poor but outside competitive society” (34). Although a large part of Holden’s competition (because of how society is structured) is with men, he is averse to competition in general, not just male competition.
Inequality, as a consequence of competition, is an aspect Holden objects to. The fact that his then roommate, Dick Slagle, had considerably less expensive suitcases than him
“depressed holy hell out of” Holden (Salinger 117). Holden finds it “really hard to be roommates with people if your suitcases are much better than theirs” (118) – the idea being that such inequality creates a divide between people. Holden experiences a similar kind of inequality when having breakfast next to the two nuns, who were only having toast and coffee: “That depressed me. I hate it if I’m eating bacon and eggs or something and somebody else is only eating toast and coffee” (119). Holden opposes inequality not only in the economic domain, but also inequality of status and popularity. For example, he criticises the fact that his schoolmate Ackley was not allowed to join the school fraternity, “because he was boring and pimply” (180).
Furthermore, he reacts to hierarchical structures, as when his teacher Mr Spencer made an obvious effort to laugh at the school headmaster’s “corny” jokes (181).
Pinku explains how Holden thinks of society as similar to a “battlefield”, where people fight for their own interests and want to show that they are superior to others (78). Inequality, in a generalised sense, implies that someone is superior to someone else in some way, that they are higher according to some criterion, such as being richer, having more status, etc. This presupposes a comparison between them. However, as Charles Taylor explains, the concept of authenticity implies that right and wrong is not a matter of mere calculation, but that this is
“anchored in our feelings”, and in this sense morality has “a voice within” (26). The issue of
whether the self is the real, authentic self is judged on the basis of that inner voice, not through a comparison to others. When someone, instead, is evaluated on the basis of a comparison to other people, the reference to the inner voice or truth risks being neglected. Consequently, such competition for superiority tends to counteract authenticity. Taylor further specifies the role instrumental reason plays in relation to authenticity. He describes instrumental reason as a type of rationality used to calculate how means can be used most economically to achieve a given end. Not everything, however, should be subject to a means-end calculation. Taylor fears that things that should be determined in other ways become the object of “efficiency or ‘cost- benefit’ analysis”, with the result that independent ends are eclipsed (5) – these ends that should be valued in themselves and not merely as means to something else. Guignon remarks that in a scientific world-view, characteristic of the Enlightenment, focus is on the quantifiable aspects of things (31). This enables a comparison between things, in a way that is not applicable to non- quantifiable phenomena, such as someone’s real personality. If things are quantified, they can be compared, whereas if two things are independent ends, valuable in themselves and not only as means, they both have their value independently of comparisons to something else, and one cannot be worth more than the other, in this sense. If two people are independent ends, and have their value in themselves, there could be no inequality between them as regards their value, and this is in line with the authentic ideal of turning inward for reference rather than applying an outer, comparative, criterion of value. Comparison lies at the root of Rousseau’s criticism of inequality caused by competition. If someone is deemed better than another in some respect, they are placed higher on the value scale in that respect. This may not be an explicit scale, but it presupposes that it can be established that someone is better or worse in that context. As Rousseau describes, people compete for higher rank, and in this process they may need to feign qualities they do not have, with resultant inauthenticity (118-119). At its core, competition means trying to be superior to someone else in some way (e.g., faster, richer, more respected).
Holden faces competition in school, in the sense that his results are compared to other pupils’
results. If all pupils were worse than him, he presumably would not be expelled, since school grades reflect a comparison of the pupil’s result to the result of other pupils, within the school and also compared to other schools. Given Holden’s view on the matter, he opts out of such competition.
Holden’s View on Authenticity
Already in the first sentence of the novel, two aspects are brought up which relate to Holden’s passion for what is real and authentic. Firstly, he focuses on his feelings, telling the reader
“I don’t feel like going into it” (Salinger 1). Feelings turn out to play a central role in Holden’s view on what is phony versus authentic. Secondly, he adds “if you want to know the truth” (1), a phrase that recurs throughout the novel, putting the focus on what is true rather than false.
Holden objects to people who try to be what they are not. For example, he tends to view religious ministers as phony, since they talk in extra holy voices instead of using their natural voice (108-109). Similarly, when meeting a student from an Ivy League university, he observes that he is phony and that he uses a characteristically “very tired, snobby” Ivy League voice (138). Holden further holds that “All those Ivy League bastards look alike” (93). Holden’s school, however, seems to regard conformity as a goal. Their slogan reads: “Since 1888 we have been moulding boys into splendid, clear-thinking young men” (2). The focus on
“moulding” boys, as if it were a mould, seems to promote conformity quite explicitly. They also put the focus on “clear-thinking”, whereas Holden rather values feeling over rational thinking. Holden refuses to adapt and conform. He fails four subjects out of five, but this does not appear to be because of a lack of ability. He is an avid reader of classics and modern literature (19), and he is called a “hot-shot in English” (30) and a “little ace composition writer”
(197). Instead of learning a variety of things, which is required in school, he focuses wholeheartedly on his interest, which apparently lies in the literary domain. Nonetheless, he has plenty of pressure on him to conform, not least from his parents. He does not want to tell his parents about his expulsion for fear of their response (54). He tries to avoid them, even when coming to the family’s apartment (168). After realizing he has been expelled, his sister Phoebe exclaims “Daddy’ll kill you!” (177), whereas Holden thinks he will merely give him hell and send him to military school (179). Still, when visiting the family’s home, he is anxious not to be discovered by his parents.
Holden appears to be, to a large extent, guided by feelings rather than rational thinking.
When he leaves Pencey Prep, he decides to do so “all of a sudden” (54). He values emotions in others. For example, his sister Phoebe, whom he values a lot, is “very emotional, for a child”
(73). One example that illustrates his emphasis on feelings is that of Richard Kinsella, who digressed during Oral Expression class. He started speaking about his family’s farm, but then switched to speaking about his uncle’s polio illness, since he suddenly became more interested in that (198). Holden explains that he appreciates when someone gets excited about a topic. In his view, this counts more than the teacher’s precept to “unify and simplify” (199). However, his emphasis on feelings can be exaggerated at times, which he admits is “crazy”, as when he told Sally he loved her: “It was a lie ... but ... I meant it when I said it. I’m crazy” (135).
Moreover, when it comes to his rapport with Jane, his feelings may get in his way. Several times during the narrative Holden thinks of calling Jane up, but he never gets around to talking to her. He claims that he “didn’t feel like it” (64) or that he “wasn’t in the mood” (68). Since he so obviously cares about Jane, it may not be in his best interest if he never manages to talk to her. Guignon notes that it can be tricky to discern what aspects of the inner life are relevant, when turning inward for guidance, and one risks being carried away by feelings and as a
consequence behave foolishly (148). In line with this, Holden might sometimes go wrong, and listen to the “wrong” feelings in this sense, which might lead him astray.
The performing arts is a field where Holden often sees a lack of authenticity. He professes to hate actors, who “never act like people” (Salinger 126). Having seen Sir Laurence Olivier, Holden criticises him for portraying Hamlet as similar to a general “instead of a sad, screwed-up type guy” (127), which would be the accurate depiction according to Holden. Since actors risk making the play phony, Holden prefers to read the plays himself (127). Having seen the famous actor couple “The Lunts”, he comments that “they were good, but they were too good” (136), indicating that they strive for excellence rather than naturalness, thereby missing what would be honest and real. As he puts it, with this type of acting, there is a risk that “you start showing off” (136). Holden’s objections to the theatre resonate with Rousseau’s views on the matter. Lionel Trilling observes that Rousseau was critical of the theatre as an art form, holding that its purpose is to please (63). The theatre spectator contracts the actor’s “disease”, i.e., “the attenuation of selfhood that results from impersonation” (64). As the actor engages in impersonation, his own existence as a person is diminished. He engages in the art of
“counterfeiting himself” (64). Trilling explains that Rousseau turns against the arts’ intention to please, which for him made the arts “the paradigm of society in its characteristic deterioration of the sentiment of being” (96). However, from having previously been intent on pleasing, from the time of Rousseau and onwards, the artist gradually ceased to be dependent upon the audience’s approval, having only himself or “some transcendent power” as reference (97).
Holden’s criticism of the theatre has a clear parallel in Rousseau’s view that theatre has a counterfeiting effect on the self and is too intent on pleasing the audience. This corresponds to the more general idea during Romanticism that the artist should turn inward and be in contact with an inner source, and not be focused on pleasing an audience.
Historically, the concept of authenticity has a special connection to the arts. The people Holden likes are often active in the arts (as he himself is, in the capacity of a writer). Jane, for example, used to practice ballet around two hours a day (Salinger 33). She also reads a lot, including poetry. According to Holden, she read “very good books” (84). Holden’s sister Phoebe, according to him, “can dance better than anybody living or dead” (77). Still, Phoebe mostly learned to dance by herself. Holden observes: “You can’t teach somebody how to really dance” (189), alluding to an idea that artistic endeavours cannot be taught. Rules can be taught, but the idea here seems to be that arts are not so much rule-based, but rather relate to something within the very person – much like other authentic expressions. Moreover, Phoebe has good taste in arts and can differentiate between good movies and bad movies (73). His brother D.B.
is a writer and, in spite of writing for Hollywood movies, he is a talented writer according to Holden (1). However, the artistic inclination of these persons could also find expression beyond the specific art forms as such. Guignon explains, relating to Jean Starobinski, that self- realization as Rousseau sees it, is “the ultimate form of artistic creation, the form to which all the other arts, as self-expressions, are subordinate” (69). According to this view, artistic creativity does not need to be restricted to art in a narrow sense, and everyone, as the creator of his or her own life, can be an artist. A propensity for artistic creativity could be reflected more generally in the personality, in accordance with the Romantic idea of art’s connection to authenticity.
Holden expresses an awareness of the distinction between authenticity and sincerity.
For example, Ernie, the piano player, acts “very phony” and shows off, but still the audience cheers him on (Salinger 91-92). After he has finished playing, Holden feels sorry for him, assuming that he does not know when he plays right. Holden blames the cheering audience, who would “foul up anybody” (92). Ernie may be sincere, but he is not authentic, since he is controlled by the audience rather than by his inner artistic integrity. He looks outwards for
guidance instead of inwards. Also with regard to himself, Holden observes this distinction.
Holden tells Phoebe that, if he were to become a lawyer, he would not know whether he was driven by worthy motives or rather by a striving for admiration from others. He concludes:
“How would you know you weren’t being a phony? The trouble is, you wouldn’t” (185). The idea is that he would not be able to adjudicate, within himself, what was authentic behaviour and what was merely behaviour controlled by society. Holden himself is not always sincere. In spite of his dislike for phoniness, he does not have any big qualms about lying; “I’m the most terrific liar you ever saw in your life” (17), he says, explaining later that he can lie for hours if he feels like it (62). He is rather afraid to lose his authenticity, whereas sincerity is something he can consciously control. This corresponds to the distinction between self-awareness and sincerity, as two constituent components of authenticity. Kadlac observes that authenticity relates to the concept of self-awareness, and that we, in order to present ourselves accurately to others, need to have knowledge about ourselves. A consequence is that someone may be sincere but present himself falsely due to a lack of self-awareness (795). Holden is worried that he might get into such a situation, and present himself falsely. Kadlac notes that Holden, when he considers being a lawyer, shares his concern that he may well be sincere but that he, for lack of self-awareness, could still be phony (796). Fallis investigates what it means to be “phony”, which does not simply mean lying. Indeed, Holden himself lies, but, as Fallis remarks, he lies with words, whereas phonies tend to deceive more with how they behave than with words.
Fallis invokes Mark Twain with his statement that non-spoken lies are far more consequential than spoken ones (15). Fallis observes that phonies need not be insincere, as such, but may in fact be deceiving themselves, which Holden is conscious of (16). More specifically, phonies
“mislead themselves and other people about who they are” – a case of “inauthenticity” (18).
Kadlac and Fallis both point out the possibility to be sincere but still present oneself falsely, through lack of self-awareness – the persons being sincere may just be deceiving themselves.
In this two-step process, involving self-knowledge and sincerity, the self-knowledge aspect appears to be the most essential to Holden, considering that he does lie, while being clearly opposed to people being phony. The person possessing self-knowledge can be sincere and authentic. But without self-knowledge even sincerity would not make someone authentic, since he or she would not be presenting his or her real self. Thus, authenticity requires self- knowledge, which implies a connection with a deeper inner voice. Moreover, sincerity is required as well, which Rousseau emphasises. Guignon remarks that it is not enough, in Rousseau’s view, to be transparent to oneself, as one’s identity also needs recognition from others – “The look of the other is needed to confirm and stabilize one’s identity” (66). Guignon adds that Rousseau sets an example in this direction through a number of autobiographies, including his Confessions (66). Rousseau held that one’s identity is stabilised as it is expressed to the external world, and in line with this, he writes his autobiographies, which enable such an expression. Holden, likewise, writes an autobiography of sorts – as he throughout the novel describes part of his life, involving events, thought and feelings.
Holden demonstrates a similarity to Rousseau also with regard to his special appreciation for children. Children have a tendency to do what they want, and not be controlled by others. About Phoebe, Holden says: “You can’t make her do something if she doesn’t want to” (Salinger 177), and if she feels like it “she can turn her back on you” (223). When meeting two little boys in the museum, one of whom does not speak at all, Holden asks the boy if he cannot talk, upon which the boy simply replies “I don’t feel like it” (218) – illustrating how a child can adhere to his feelings rather than convention. At one point, when feeling depressed, Holden is cheered up by a boy singing the song “If a body catch a body coming through the rye” – singing for “the hell of it” (125), not caring what others would think. This ability, typical of children, to not be controlled by social expectations is greatly valued by Rousseau.
Alessandro Ferrara explains that Rousseau, in his work Emile, presents his programme for
“negative education” – “according to which no direct attempt to shape the child’s beliefs, character and morality is allowed” (6). The child’s individuality should be allowed to develop without external interference. Guignon describes how Rousseau, in Emile, trusts nature’s impulses, but refutes the idea of original sin, claiming that the child should not act because of others, but because of “what nature asks of him; then he will never do wrong” (57). This is attained by listening inwardly to basic feelings, as worth is dictated by our most inner feelings, while reason cannot show what is worthwhile (58). Guignon adds that Rousseau writes in Emile: “Conscience! Conscience! Divine instinct, immortal voice from heaven ... infallible judge of good and evil” (58). In this perspective, what is right to do is determined by reference to the conscience, as a part of the inner self. Rousseau, building on the idea that humans are naturally good, wanted to preserve that good quality, emphasising in Emile that the child’s character should not be shaped, in opposition to Pencey Prep’s ambition to “mould” the pupils, and that they should resist social pressure. Holden, indeed, does resist social pressure in school, pressure to make an effort in various subjects, so much so that he is expelled. If Rousseau’s character Emile would have been placed at Pencey Prep, he might well have been expelled too, given that he was taught to resist social pressure. In a way, Holden’s expulsion could even be seen as a success, in the sense that he lives his life philosophy, and that he may be exemplifying Rousseau’s educational ideas, not adapting to outer criteria. Still, such an uncompromising stance might have worked better in another time and place, but seems to create friction in relation to Holden’s modern society, in line with Guignon’s claim that society counteracts authenticity (4-5).
It appears that Holden is somehow afraid of losing part of himself – hence the urgency to escape an unattractive future. When he asks his friend Sally to elope with him, she advises him to wait until after college. Holden contradicts her, saying that there would not be, as she claims, “oodles of places to go to at all. It’d be entirely different” (Salinger 143). In his view,
he would at that time be caught up in a professional career and a stereotypical adult life in general (144). At one point, he even has the fearful sensation of disappearing altogether. Each time he crosses a street he feels that he would not reach the other side: “I thought I’d just go down, down, down, and nobody’d ever see me again” – and in this situation he pleads to his late brother Allie: “Allie, don’t let me disappear” (213). This feeling of disappearing may well be linked to his imminent entry into adulthood. Priest describes how, for Holden, the phony quality threatens to spoil “the authenticity and purity which he reveres in others and seeks to protect inside himself” (211). He criticises Holden for being unable to “let go of childhood”
(215). He points out that Holden, throughout the narrative, “separates the ‘phoney’ world of the adults and other adolescents from [the] authentic world of the child” (216). As Priest observes, Holden seeks to protect the purity inside of himself and it is hard for him to let go of childhood.
Holden seems to fear that entering adulthood would destroy this pure quality in him, and he wants to escape his unattractive future prospects, thus being shielded from such a harmful influence. This also relates to Rousseau’s view on the cohesiveness of the self, discussed by Ferrara, who explains how Rousseau, in his novel Julie, or the New Heloise, shows “the destructive effects on inauthenticity on the cohesion of the self” (26). The protagonist Julie misjudges the relevance of her feelings and faces “psychological disintegration” (37). Ferrara further notes that it can sometimes be impossible to undertake a certain action and “at the same time meaningfully continue to answer the question ‘Who am I?’ in the same way as before.
Rousseau expresses this point through the metaphor of the self collapsing” (37). In this case, the person has to act a certain way, “lest he should become another person” (38). In this perspective, given a certain line of inauthentic actions, the person would not be cohesive but would psychologically disintegrate and turn into “another person”. This may be a reason for Holden’s anxiety about disappearing altogether. He may fear that entering the inauthentic adult world would turn him into another person.
Takeuchi relates Holden’s situation to Zen archery. In this type of archery, in the words of German writer Herrigel, quoted by Takeuchi, “the contest consists in the archer aiming at himself ... and yet not himself, and thus becoming simultaneously the aimer and the aim” (57).
According to Takeuchi, Salinger was familiar with Zen Buddhism and presented a similar theme in his short story “Seymour: An Introduction”, where the protagonist Seymour advises his friend, when playing curb marbles: “Could you try not aiming so much?” (55). Takeuchi suggests that Holden, towards the end of the narrative, has “moved beyond the stage of consciously pursuing goals, in other words, of taking aim” (61). Here it is described how the Zen archer, in addition to being the aimer, also becomes the aim. The goal, in an authentic context, is first and foremost to be oneself, and this requires looking inward. Then, while being oneself, one’s actions will be an expression of this real self. The real aims will be pursued in accordance with the real self. To accomplish this, it is necessary to first look inward at the self, thus being the “aim”. Holden displays a reluctance to set and pursue outer goals. Given his seeming talent, he should have no real problem passing his subjects at school. Still, he does not pursue this as a goal, he does not “aim” for this, being more oriented towards his feelings. In accordance with Takeuchi’s observation, Holden may be beyond the conscious pursuit of goals.
Rousseau remarked that asking others what we are creates deceptive façades (135-136). Holden wants to act according to what he is. He wants his actions to be in line with his identity, providing for the cohesiveness of the self. Pitofsky comments that, given Holden’s aversion to success, his school failures come as “no great surprise” (68). He adds that Holden withdraws from competitive activities and is expelled from school, not because of a lack of ability but rather because of not making any effort (73). This observation seems correct, considering that succeeding in school is not part of Holden’s goals, not part of his perspective on life. This goes hand in hand with his strong resistance to competition and his care for authentic life. Priest’s assertion that there is “something wrong” with Holden and that be faces only “despair and
defeat” (211) may be questioned in view of this. His actions are a logical consequence of his life philosophy – which corresponds in several ways to the ideas of Romanticism in general and to Rousseau’s ideas in particular. His actions and thoughts form a coherent whole, with a basis in philosophical tradition. This uncompromising stance, however coherent and founded on philosophical precepts, may still create problems when applied in a modern, competitive society, as it indeed does for Holden.
The Consequences for Holden
It is not a pleasant predicament Holden finds himself in. He does not feel well. He almost wishes he was dead (Salinger 98). He says that he felt like committing suicide (113) and towards the end of the narrative, Holden says: “I think I was more depressed than I ever was in my whole life” (209). He repeatedly describes his feeling of loneliness: “I felt so damn lonesome” (51), and later: “I got feeling so lonesome and rotten” (53). Kadlac notes that Holden’s major problem is that “many people are fake ... and are not really who or what they seem to be” (792). This constitutes a problem in more than one way. Taylor points out that being authentic is not merely a means to an end, but an end in itself – it is understood as “its own goal” (64). Considering this, one reason that such falsity is a problem is because the authentic person is seen as an independent end, intrinsically valuable, not just instrumental to something else – authenticity is a goal in itself. Another aspect of it is that it blocks real communication and connection. If people are not being themselves, they cannot communicate honestly from themselves. If people lack self-awareness, awareness of the “real” self, they cannot communicate from this deeper aspect of the self. Any communication would be shallow, in the sense that it is not anchored in the real self, not an expression of this. As regards people who are not sincere, they do not communicate honestly, by definition. The result in these cases is a false or distorted
communication, which does not bring about a true connection. Although Holden does meet and talk with a number of people, he still feels very lonely. It appears that he is longing for a more real connection to others. Rousseau relates to this, in his description of how competition creates the necessity of being other than one is, creating artificial people (135-136). This would prevent the kind of real communication and connection Holden is yearning for. To get out of this painful predicament, Holden basically has three options, which are listed by Ohmann as: “do the best you can with this society; work for a better one; flee society altogether” (33). In other words, these options are: to find a compromise with society, to improve society or to escape society.
Holden considers all these three options in one way or another, as will be described below.
On the subject of escaping, Holden briefly plays with the idea of joining a monastery, but quickly realises that this is also a kind of society, with possible defects, where probably all the monks would be “stupid bastards” (Salinger 53). He considers eloping with Sally to some rural place, but Sally is against the idea (142-143). Later, he considers going away alone to possibly find a job on a ranch in Colorado (178). He also considers simply hitchhiking his way
“out West”. He does not mind what job he does there, the essential thing being that no one knows him there. To avoid conversations, he would pretend to be a deaf-mute. He envisions that, if he would have children there, they would not be sent to school but rather they would be homeschooled (213-214). Holden imagines that his brother D.B. could visit him, as long as he did not write movies there, the rule being that “nobody could do anything phony when they visited me” (220-221). Thus, this would be a true refuge from phoniness.
Alternatively, instead of escaping, Holden could try to work out a compromise with society, while staying in it, and this is more or less the subject of his conversation with Mr Antolini, his former teacher. Antolini talks about those who give up looking for what they want, and warns that Holden might die nobly for un unworthy cause (202). Antolini advises Holden to apply himself in school, insisting that Holden does love knowledge (203). He points
out that, through the process of education, Holden could get closer to the kind of information he loves. Against the background of his newfound knowledge, he would feel less alone in his aversion to society. Antolini tells Holden: “Many, many men have been just as troubled morally and spiritually as you are right now” (204). Antolini explains the value of education (204) and how this creates an opportunity to discover oneself and realise what “kind of thoughts” would be suitable to oneself (205). In fact, when starting school, pupils tend to study the same subjects, but as education progresses, on through higher education, there tends to be an increasing possibility to choose one’s specialisation, leading to less conformity. Still, Holden seems set on specialising immediately, being unwilling to do the variety of things his school requires. In the penultimate chapter, there is some indication that Holden may be coming to terms with competition, to a degree. While riding the carousel, the children try to grab for the gold ring (a practice used for some carousels, where those riding the carousel can grab a brass ring which comes from a dispenser during the ride). This is a kind of competition entailing some risk, since the children might fall off in the process. Holden still thinks that he should just let them do it (227). He watches Phoebe going around on the carousel and he explains: “I felt so damn happy all of a sudden” (229). This scene could be interpreted more or less metaphorically. Grabbing the ring means a kind of competition between the children, which Holden apparently accepts.
The golden ring has a visual similarity to money (golden, round) and could be a metaphor for money, in which case Holden could be seen to approve of economic competition. Moreover, he accepts that the children may fall. This could be seen as just a literal fall or as a metaphorical fall from innocence into adulthood. Alternatively, in a simpler interpretation, Holden could just appreciate that Phoebe is having fun, and realize that life does not always need to be so serious – that one can have fun in spite of society’s deficiencies.
As a third option, Holden could try to make society better, and counteract the phoniness that so distresses him. Asked by Phoebe to name something he would like to be, he gives the
following account, admitting that it is “crazy”: “I keep picturing all these little kids playing some game in this big field of rye and all ... And I’m standing on the edge of some crazy cliff.
What I have to do, I have to catch everybody if they start to go over the cliff ... That’s all I’d do all day. I’d just be the catcher in the rye and all” (186). This would indeed be a crazy idea if it is understood literally, since there is no such job. Figuratively, however, he might well do something along these lines, if it simply means to help children protect their innocence and real nature as they grow up. This could be done as an educator or, alternatively, by working to shape society in such a way that people can better preserve their innocence and their true selves. Such a practical ambition is in fact presented in the works of Rousseau. Ferrara remarks that Rousseau not only identified the problems in society, but also tried to resolve them. Two of his main works, Emile and The Social Contract, discuss different aspects of the solution. In these works, Rousseau strives to provide “a legitimate and equitable political order and an educational program aimed at strengthening the individual’s capacity to resist social pressure toward insincerity” (25-26). This dual ambition of Rousseau’s could illustrate a way for Holden to realise his vocation of “saving” the children, in education or by working for a better society.
Ohmann relates the narrative to a specific politico-economic situation, where socialism was clearly opposed to capitalism (16-17), and while Holden does not pronounce political solutions, certain ideas relating to these issues may be implicitly present in his reflections.
In the last chapter, Holden writes from the vantage point of the health facility where he ends up. He is asked if he is going to apply himself in school in the autumn. He maintains his attitude of being responsive to himself in the moment, and claims that he would not know until that time. He also says that he could tell more, but that he does not “feel like it” (Salinger 230).
He still maintains the reliance on feeling that pervades the narrative. When asked by D.B. to give his opinion on the story just told, he claims to be uncertain of what he thinks about it. But he is certain that he, in a way, misses everybody in his story, even the ones he did not like (230).
This seems to amount to a sort of compromise with society, and an expression of a wish not to escape it. At the health facility, Holden is somehow outside of normal society, but he apparently feels that society, with its defects, is still better than no society, and he misses being part of it.
Priest claims that a greater acceptance of the phony would be beneficial for Holden’s development (215). Indeed, Holden appears to accept the phony more at this point in the narrative. Since he misses everyone, it seems that he is not completely critical of them. Pitofsky observes that Holden, towards the end, as his younger sister rides the carousel, tends to view competition in a less judgemental way (82). That may well be the case at that point. Still, it is important to note that Holden tells his entire story in retrospect, when being at the health institution. Consequently, he must conceivably stand behind what he says during the entire story. To say that he has changed his view could be a mistake. However, one could say that he is open to various perspectives, where some are more judgemental of phoniness and competition whereas others are less so. In view of this, Holden seems to ultimately opt for a certain compromise with society, while he, as the “catcher in the rye”, has a wish to somehow help people and thereby make society better.
Conclusion
Holden is averse to competition, such as economic competition, competition in sports, competition in love and more generally competition to gain superiority. He prefers persons who are not overly competitive and who do not try to be superior to others. Likewise, he dislikes inequality, which means that some are superior to others, economically or otherwise. Such superiority presupposes a comparison, where one is higher than the other on some sort of scale.
The question of whether someone is his or her real, authentic self is not established by comparison to others, but by reference to an inner truth. Trying to be superior, in competition,
involves a comparison to others that tends to counteract the responsiveness to this inner truth.
A focus of what is quantifiable (such as in competition) is in line with a scientific world-view, linked to instrumental reason, as dominant during the Enlightenment. Romanticism, as a reaction against the Enlightenment, rather emphasized a truth based on feelings. As instrumental reason is weakened, independent ends can be more valued in their own right.
Holden dislikes too much conformity and he tends to rely on feelings more than reason.
He dislikes phoniness, which amounts to a lack of authenticity. His view has several parallels with the ideas of Rousseau. One such parallel is the criticism of theatre for being phony/inauthentic. Still, Holden’s appreciation for the arts more in general resonates with the primacy of art during Romanticism. Holden is not satisfied with mere sincerity, but strives towards authenticity, which also requires self-knowledge. However, Holden, like Rousseau, seems to strive for sincerity as well, as exemplified by his autobiographical writing. Another parallel to Rousseau is Holden’s glorification of childhood and his view that children should maintain their natural character, in spite of social pressure. Moving towards adulthood, Holden is afraid of losing himself, as in the example of Rousseau’s Julie. He values authentic qualities in others and he wants to preserve those in himself. He wants to preserve a connection to his inner truth, and let his actions be based on that, rather than on the outer precepts of the adult world. Holden yearns for real communication, while this is being blocked by his surrounding competition and the resultant inauthenticity. He considers escaping, compromising with society or improving society. In the end, he apparently is not favourable to the idea of escaping, opting for a certain compromise with society, while his stated vocation, to be the catcher in the rye, can be figuratively seen as a wish to improve society – in line with Rousseau’s practical ambitions in education and politics.
In conclusion, Holden’s thoughts and actions form a coherent whole, with several parallels to a Romantic view of the authentic subject in general, and specifically to the ideas of
Rousseau. Holden favours the inner-directed life, valuing human authenticity, which is an end in itself. Competition implies acting in comparison to someone else, and such comparison imposes an outer evaluation of one’s actions. This outer evaluation is in conflict with the inner evaluation of actions favoured by Holden. Hence, competition is in contradiction to his view on authenticity, and his resistance to competition is a logical consequence of his care for human authenticity. Given this inner logic, The Catcher in the Rye invites a reflection on how excessive competition might counteract an authentic human existence.
Works Cited
Fallis, Don. “The Most Terrific Liar You Ever Saw in Your Life”. The Catcher in the Rye and Philosophy: A Book for Bastards, Morons, and Madmen, edited by Keith Dromm and Heather Salter, Open Court, 2012, pp. 11-21.
Ferrara, Alessandro. “Rousseau and Critical Theory.” Brill Research Perspectives in Critical Theory, vol. 1, no. 1, 2017, pp. 1-55.
Guignon, Charles. On Being Authentic. Routledge, 2004.
Kadlac, Adam. “The Challenge of Authenticity: Enhancement and Accurate Self‐
Presentation.” Journal of Applied Philosophy, vol. 35, no. 4, 2018, pp. 790-808.
Ohmann, Carol, and Richard Ohmann. “Reviewers, Critics, and ‘the Catcher in the Rye’.”
Critical Inquiry, vol. 3, no. 1, 1976, pp. 15-37.
Pinku, Guy. “The Moral Call and the Moral Catch”. The Catcher in the Rye and Philosophy:
A Book for Bastards, Morons, and Madmen, edited by Keith Dromm and Heather Salter, Open Court, 2012, pp. 77-86.
Pitofsky, Alex. “Masculine Competition and Boarding-School Culture in the Catcher in the Rye.” Studies in Popular Culture, vol. 34, no. 1, 2011, pp. 67-85.
Priest, Benjamin. “The Catcher in the Rye and the ill member of the group: Holden Caulfield and adolescent development.” Psychodynamic Practice, vol. 22, no. 3, 2016, pp. 209-222.
Rousseau, Jean-Jacques, and Maurice Cranston. A Discourse on Inequality. Penguin Books, 1984.
Salinger, J. D. The Catcher in the Rye. Penguin Books, 2010.
Takeuchi, Yasuhiro. “The Zen Archery of Holden Caulfield.” English Language Notes, vol. 42, no. 1, 2004, pp. 55-63.
Taylor, Charles. The Ethics of Authenticity. Harvard University Press, 1991.
Trilling, Lionel. Sincerity and Authenticity. Harvard University Press, 1972.
