This preview shows page 1. Sign up to view the full content.
Unformatted text preview: Still others condemned the novel. The Christian Science Monitor (July 19, 1951) complained of the "wholly repellent" vulgarity and "sly perversion" of the piece, concluding that no one who truly loved children could have written such a work. In another widely quoted assessment, Catholic World (November 1951) complained about the "excessive use of amateur swearing and coarse language" and suggested that "some of the events stretch probability," calling Holden "monotonous and phony." British reviewers were generally unimpressed. The Spectator (August 17, 1951) considered it to be "inconclusive" in theme and a bit too "showy." Times Literary Supplement (September 7, 1951) complains that the "endless stream of blasphemy and obscenity" gets boring after the first chapter....
View Full Document
This note was uploaded on 12/05/2011 for the course ENGLISH 101 taught by Professor Staff during the Fall '11 term at Texas State.
- Fall '11