Comments on: Speaking of Catch 22

By: mkilby

mkilby — Tue, 03 Nov 2009 07:24:57 +0000

@Duncan - Nemo has become a compelling character largely through the various film versions. I must admit that I did not read the “original” book (in French), so I can’t judge the quality of the English translation. Nevertheless, all too often screenwriters mutilate books in order to condense the material for the film version, but I think this is one case where the screenwriters had a good opportunity to make some improvements to the tale.

By: Duncan

Duncan — Tue, 03 Nov 2009 01:32:33 +0000

“If you’re looking for some famous “literature” that is vastly overrated, try “20000 Leagues Under the Sea”.” - I find Nemo fairly compelling.

Seriously though, Catch-22 is an easily read comic book of only around 500 pages or so. If you can’t finish it, frankly, you’re just not trying.

@Hibbs - At different times in your life you find different parts compelling. My first time through I was all about Orr (’Appleby has flies in his eyes!’), next time Natley’s perennial struggle with his whore seemed strangely profound to me. Last time I read it I remember being more impressed by the satire of capitalism in the form of Milo than I’d been before. A book for all seasons, never dull.

By: Hibbs

Hibbs — Mon, 02 Nov 2009 20:42:34 +0000

I always list C22 as one of my favorites whenever such lists are brought up. When I first read it in college, I thought it was terribly funny. When I reread it twenty years later, I found it terribly sad. In any case, I think it makes more sense or is at least more interesting if you first read “Crime and Punishment”.

By: mkilby

mkilby — Mon, 02 Nov 2009 14:34:18 +0000

If you’re looking for some famous “literature” that is vastly overrated, try “20000 Leagues Under the Sea”. I made it through, but was very disappointed by the ending, and the whole point of the book is to have an opportunity to present incredible descriptions and impossible scenery. It’s similar to the “eye candy” that Rowling uses so often in Harry Potter: myriad adjectives and objects that have nothing to do with the plot, but are fun to describe. Unfortunately, they are not always fun to plow through as a reader.

By: Dave in Boston

Dave in Boston — Mon, 02 Nov 2009 06:57:10 +0000

That’s as may be (without getting into an argument over authorial intent) but ultimately filler is… filler, and I’d rather read 450 pages of novel.

I’m aware essentially all 18th-century novels are padded out with filler, but some writers did a better job of integrating the whole thing together than others.

By: waferthinmint

waferthinmint — Mon, 02 Nov 2009 04:54:55 +0000

David in Boston: your comment reminded of the New Englander trying a banana for the first time.

“how did you like it?” “well, after you pare and core it there isn’t overmuch left to enjoy.”

Moby Dick is about the filler. Ahab is just part of the filler. this is intentional on HM’s part.

By: Frank the curmudgeon

Frank the curmudgeon — Mon, 02 Nov 2009 04:42:45 +0000

It took me over 30 years to finish WAR AND PEACE.

By: Dave in Boston

Dave in Boston — Mon, 02 Nov 2009 00:23:53 +0000

Catch-22 was ok. Moby Dick is vastly overrated. (For all it’s supposed to be this gripping picture of a man obsessed, there’s scarcely any development of that, and what there is becomes hopelessly diluted by the great wads of filler material.)

Mark Twain, on the other hand, was actually a good writer.

By: aprilp_katje

aprilp_katje — Sun, 01 Nov 2009 14:04:55 +0000

Aw, I love Catch-22. I’ve read it twice and will probably read it at least two more times. The book never seemed especially long to me.

By: buzz

buzz — Sat, 31 Oct 2009 20:26:49 +0000

waferthinmint: Yeah, big fan of SOMETIMES A GREAT NOTION (book & movie; I’m one of the very few people who enjoyed the film, it appears). Also liked CUCKOO’S NEST; I think SOMETIMES is the better story but CUCKOO has the more memorable characters.