Catch 22

I really enjoyed this book. The style of the humour really appealed to me, and there are a few passages that I'll always think of as among the funniest I've read. There's also a particular scene - where the plane flies too low over the raft the men swim off - that I'll always think of as one of the saddest I've read. On second reading, though, there's also a lot in here that drags, and I didn't get to finish it second time around. Glad I've read it, though, and for anyone out there who hasn't, I'd say it's worth a look.

Enh. I wasn't that impressed. This is one of those books that the people who love it LOVE it. In fact they think you are a fool for not loving it. It just wasn't that good, and I think it is a bit of lazy to write an absurd book about an absurd topic. Not too much of a reach, is it?

I LOVE IT, and your a fool ;)

Only kidding. I do love it though ...

i'm afrid bkoplitz i love it too and i'm the biggest fool ever. its genius, gold. but of course absurdly absurd - eh like war!! oh the horror the horror of shaving in cold water, truly absurd.
but mdixon yr comment below about 100 million liking it therefore its good, george bush won a majority vote (at least the second time) and to prove on taste - 100 million people have seen Bon Jovi live!!!!!!!!

I tried reading it more than once and couldn't keep going. However, IMHO, reading a novel is a very personal experience and there all kinds of people. My goodness, think about, some people love Spam (the tinned fake meat) and others like fine dining on raw vegetables! It's a very personal matter. Wonderful when you can share the experience, but it won't be to everyone's taste.

eh...not my kind of humor

Not at all - in fact I don't think I've heard one convincing argument in favour of Catch 22, mostly people using such words as charm and wit and surreal, which is all dreamy and nice, but not very compelling or insightful. I've set my stall out from the beginning - that the book has poor dialogue, an overuse of adverbs that drag the style down, and so on. That's my position, and nobody has said anything that remotely challenges my view. All I've heard is that its part of the tone of the novel, or that it captures the 'feeling' of the book, or that its 'satirical'... And TCook, you admitted in an earlier post that the stuff I'm talking about is a weakness of Heller's writing style, so you must at least have some empathy with my views. You also said that 'people don't communicate in the way that people do', but it's Heller's accidental style, so he can get away with it because the book 'transcends' the problem. That's a shaky argument if ever there was one!
As for best seller lists, I agree that there is no tangible way of discerning a books quality. But how many copies they sold is certainly not one of them. Sure, Da Vinci Code has sold tons, but I don't know anybody who likes it. It's like saying Westlife are good because they have sold a lot of records to pre-pubescent girls. Not exactly indicative of the population as a whole.

I really struggled with this novel. It's not that I didn't like it, it's just that it's one of those novels that appears in people's 'favourite' lists and so one comes to it with high expectations. Much of the satire is very wry but as an overall experience I wasn't entirely captivated. It's certainly one of those books I'd like to have a second crack at one of these days.

I think you will find that most people who have Catch 22 on the bookshelf have (a) read it and (b) enjoyed it and (c) have an opinion about it.

That's not having a 'difficult' book on the shelf for show. It's having a darn good book that's made you think as well as entertained you. I fear the argument is slipping away from you here.

Sure, the subject matter is challenging. And yes, I would agree that the novel does contain a certain charm and significance. But the fact that it is loved by many people is irrelevant. To argue that because Catch 22 is a 'difficult' novel makes it somehow more brilliant is lopsided thinking. There are plenty of novels out there that address difficult issues but remain well-written and convincing. But sadly, Catch 22 isn't one of them. Where the reading public fall down in my view is that they seem to go for the lowest common denominator and accept poor writing, something which Catch 22 is full of. Its a real shame, because the story is wonderful, and in the hands of somebody who had a basic concept of language it could have been a masterpiece. (Heller must have been a loner, for he has no ear for the way people talk). And this cannot be excused by the subject matter, however challenging. The only reason Catch 22 has sold so many copies is because of bandwagon jumping and people wanting to show off their literary prowess by having a 'difficult' novel on their bookcase.

Wow - where do I start :)

I think you may have things upside down, remember the old adage - the customer is always right. Writers can't dictate the what the reading public should and shouldn't like? After all, they offer the only tangible measurement of a books quality - if 10 million people say the da vinci code is a classic and 100 people say it's rubbish, then I'm sorry but the 10 million have to win.

Anyway - I'm digressing! I love catch-22, and agree with Tcook that the writing style captures the general feeling of the book - even if it is purely by accident!

As for the showing off - there is an interesting article here about the top 10 books people pretend to have read - funny stuff :) http://www.booktribes.com/blog/2007/02/11/britons-lie-about-what-they-ha...

Surely rules (can there be such things in writing?) are made to be broken - and when they are broken well then excellence often ensues. It doesn't matter if this is accidental or not. The proof of the pudding and all that - and in the case of Catch 22 I find a book of immense charm, wit and significance. It doesn't mean that everyone has to find it so - but the fact that many millions love what is essentially a difficult and dangerous novel (unlike most 'best sellers') is a strong testament to its brilliance.

Sorry, but most of what you say is garbage. Firstly, 'How To Write' books were commonplace throughout the 20th century, e.g. Strunk & White's 'The Elements Of Style' from 1918. (Heller would have done well to follow rules 12, 13.) It's not a question of breaking rules - bad writing is bad writing, and you can dress it up as satire or a parody or tone or the absurd or whatever you want, but someone who writes dialogue and uses adverbs in the way Heller does can only create an impression of incompetence and frustration in the reader. Good writing can stand up on its own without resorting to shoddy language in the name of 'satire'. I'll agree with you, the tone of the novel is mad, so mad, it makes you want to throw the book out the window after five pages.

Well, I guess we'll have to agree to disagree on this one. In my opinion a book cannot be good if it has bad dialogue and overuse of adverbs, no matter how good the story is.

I think that the weakness in the writing style is demonstrated in Heller's other books - but Catch 22 is so good that it transcends the problem. I tend to agree with mdixon that it actually adds to the surreal and crazy feel of the book. The people don't communicate in the way that people do - but then again they are in the middle of a war and face what they know is a pointless and arbitrary death through the insanity of others every day. Having read his other books I think that the style is probably accidental - but it works for me nevertheless.

Dialogue tags were commonplace in nonthreatening fiction back in 1961. The How to Write books had yet to enforce their orthodoxy on the impressionable, who take their rules to be absolutes, not understanding that rules can be broken if they're broken for a reason. Heller uses tags in a satirical fashion, making up all sorts of new ones in a parody of the cosy popular fiction Catch-22 most certainly isn't. They're part of the tone of the novel, where everything is mad but real, real but mad. The conversations in the book are for the most part absurd, the situation is absurd, the war is absurd, even death is absurd. Nothing makes sense in this world yet everyone continues as if it does.

Betamax? I grew up with the Ferguson Videostar!!

The fact is, this novel is a classic example of a brilliant story ruined in the hands of a poor writer. And I think this is an indictment of fiction that still stands. Too many terrific storytellers who don't know how to write, many of whom sell too many copies to readers who sadly don't seem to know better. When you read books that are written well (Elmore Leonard, Dennis Lehane to name but two), the shortcomings of lesser writers stick out like a sore thumb. There's so much good stuff out there to be wasting valuable reading time on weak fiction.

You could have been a betamax salesman :)

An anti-war masterpiece, funny, original, compassionate and sane.

Sorry to put a downer on things, but this book is a classic example of a terrific story (and I am sincere on that) ruined by an author who, sadly, can't write for toffee. In the hands of someone who could write dialogue and didn't spread adverbs around like confetti, this book would be a masterpiece. Examples: "With whose name?" asked the second C.I.D. man cunningly, and one from Yossarin that finished with... 'he spluttered avuncularly.' Abysmal writing - why not just say 'he said.' What's the point of the words cunningly or avuncularly? If the dialogue was any good, you could tell how the line was meant to be said, and the adverb is redundant. I know I sound anal-retentive, but sloppy writing like that drives me up the wall. Unfortunately Catch 22 is full of this tat and it makes me want to scream when I read it. Anyway, rant over!

I have to say I quite like the awkward feel to the writing - it adds to the general madness. Didn't a critic once write something like "it reads like someone has SHOUTED it onto the page" - well I agree with that, and think its a good thing!

having said that I'm under 30 and went to a state school so never studied grammer :) LOL

I love the way time is jumbled up, like the insanity of the war has affected cause and effect as well. Has anyone else tried to work out the exact order of events, with a paper and pen (completely negationg the point, I'm sure) or is it just me?

I have always wanted to do that, and am in fact saving it for my retirement - honestly, the day I'm too old to surf I'm going to get out one of those big long bits of old fashioned dot matrix computer paper (with the holes in the side) and put the book into order. How sad am I. Actually, someone must have done that already on this big old internet thing ... google, here I come :)

A book I come back to time after time. It's as fresh today as the day it was written - funny, witty and bitingly cutting.

If you haven't read this superb 'comedy of war' then do so immediately!

can you guess where my username came from?

I thought so. I haven't really heard that name anywhere before.

What a genious book! It's terrific.

has to be the best book ever ...

love it love it love it ...

just brilliant