A really cool post about the plain maroon cover of The Catcher in the Rye
The dustjacket on the original 1951 edition, designed by Michael Mitchell, had a Ben Shahn-style drawing of a carousel horse dwarfing the skyline of uptown Manhattan, an image clearly inspired by the book?s ?so damn nice? final scene. Early in its paperback life, I recall it had an incarnation I hated: a drawing of protagonist Holden Caulfield wearing the Sherlock Holmes-style hat described in the book (but looking much dorkier, somehow, than I had pictured him in my mind).
Then somewhere along the way (Was it the mid-sixties? My attempts to find a chronology have been unavailing), Catcher acquired the cover it bore when I checked it out for the first time. I?ve heard rumors, but have not yet found any proof, that Salinger so hated the earlier illustrations that he insisted that the covers of all his books be type-only. Certainly this was borne out by the U.S. paperback editions of his other three books then in circulation. Nine Stories had its grid of colored squares (courtesy of Pushpin); the two Zen-themed books about the Glass family, Franny and Zooey
and Raise High the Roof Beam, Carpenters
both bore someone?s idea of Asian-flavored lettering.
But for me, the maroon cover of Catcher has a special place. Blank, enigmatic, vaguely dangerous, it was the perfect tabula rasa upon which I could project all my adolescent loneliness, insecurity, anger and sentimentality. It was as if possessing it provided a password into an exclusive club, even if that club existed only in your own mind. I wonder if a different cover, a more ?designed? cover, could have been able to contain quite so much emotion and meaning.
I’m glad I still have my battered old maroon-covered paperback. It’s the same one I’ve had since I first read it in high school. The spine is now taped back together, and pages have dislodged themselves from the glue completely. But … I don’t know. I’m sentimental. Not about most copies of books … but about this one, I am.
It’s a great post … and the last paragraph is terrific and true. I couldn’t agree more.
(via Dr. Frank)
Sheila, Thank you so much for directing me to Design Observer’s site. They even mention PMS colors…that tickles my geeky, design soul. I am a late comer to The Catcher in the Rye. I must have started it in school long ago…but never finished it. I had a beat up copy, with the maroon cover, that I dragged around with me from move to move. Finally, last year I started over & read it from cover to cover. I loved every bit of Salinger’s realistic style. This story was told in the most purely human voice I’ve ever read (not phony at all). This was truly the voice of a teenaged boy…not a man trying to sound like a troubled boy.
“The best thing, though, in that museum was that everything always stayed right where it was. Nobodyd move. . . . Nobodyd be different. The only thing that would be different would be you.”
I could seriously quote this book all day.
I have one of the old copies with Holden and his red hat that I have never been able to read. It just doesn’t seem like the same book. I enjoy having it because it is unusual, but I never read from it. An old girlfriend sent me a copy several years ago that is white with a rainbow diagonal in the upper left-hand corner(Little, Brown, and Co.). I can read it, but I still prefer the maroon cover. It seems strange that the cover could influence my feelings about a book I have read at least ten times.
That is a nice book jacket design, but I must confess. (And I will probably be hated and roundly criticized and then booted out on my ass.) I hate Holden Caulfield. Loathe him in fact. I was a slacker in high school so I missed out on a lot of good books. I finally read The Catcher in the Rye as an adult and I was pissed. “This is what they’ve been making a big deal about? This little asshole?” Really, I had a visceral response to him the likes of which I rarely feel for characters in books or movies. (George Costanza is another such character.) Maybe my loathing of Holden is attributable to Salingers genius? Can someone more literate than I help me out here?
DBW – did you read the whole post over there that I linked to? The last paragraph references the little rainbow design book cover – I couldn’t agree more with his sentiment about the rainbows. Go check it out.
Patrick – every time I post of my love for this book, someone leaves a comment that is almost word for word like yours.
I honestly can’t answer the question. It’s a matter of taste. How can I respond? You loathe Holden Caulfield. I love Holden Caulfield. its like me hating bananas, or hating applesauce. I just do. Someone who loves bananas could blather at me about how great they are until they are blue in the face – but why bother? I just hate them.
Maybe you need to have read it in adolescence, when you are the same age as Holden – you know, it’s a rallying cry for the misfits. To me, the book says: You’re not alone. Also: it is one of the best indictments of phonies that has ever been written. I really responded to that when I was 15. I guess I still do. maybe you need to be a certain kind of teenager to have loved the book … I have no idea. It changed my life. I love Holden. He helped me through some rough moments. The book also makes me laugh out loud – just the prose alone makes me laugh, just the way he writes. But the appreciation of its literary qualities came later – when I read it again as an adult. As a teenager – the book felt more like a bolt of truth coming right at me.
Some people get frustrated with Holden’s personality. They think he’s a whiny loser. I never ever do. Mainly because: his older brother, who he loved more than anything, died a year before the start of the book. So to me it always made total sense that he’s all messed up, and acting out, and feeling bleak about life. He lost his brother.
Maybe I saw myself in Holden. Maybe you don’t see yourself in Holden. I can’t answer your question, is I guess what I’m trying to say.
Actually, Patrick, the bananas analogy is not the best analogy – I thought of a better one.
I despised the movie Forrest Gump. I didn’t just dislike it – I openly thought it was a stupid movie with a stupid message. And … the brou-haha over that movie, its near-universal success, the way people fell over each other to say it was the best and most profound movie they had ever seen … baffles me to this day.
Friends of mine loved the movie. People I respect and love. They have told me why they loved it. I nod politely. I respect their opinions. But my response to the movie was visceral loathing. Can’t really do anything about it. I am left out of the “Forrest Gump is Brilliant” club, I guess. :)
Thanks, Sheila. I get what you’re saying. It’s interesting the way we all respond so individually to art, movies, books, etc. I mean, I like Titanic (as you know) and people think I’m nuts for having seen it so many times.
Patrick – oh, don’t even get me started on the Titanic snobs. I will no longer discuss Titanic with people who shout “HOW COULD YOU HAVE LIKED IT?” right in my face. Or who snicker. Or who assume superiority in any way. I maintain my position in serenity and peace and I will not be bullied by those snobs. Many of whom have never even seen the film.
i’m with Camille Paglia: kate Winslet was ROBBED. (Did you read the piece she wrote on Salon after Winslet “lost” to Helen Hunt? It was absolutely hilarious. But still: it made some amazing points about the movie.)
when anyone sees Helen Hunt on the street, they should shout, “Give back Kate Winslet’s Oscar!”
hahahahahaha You read it!!!
I love it when Camille gets pissed.