Catch-22, by Joseph Heller

[keilexandra]

Catch-22
by Joseph Heller
463 pages (trade paperback)
Genre: Fiction/Literary/Historical

Um, WTF?

This was funny--not as funny as Pratchett, not even close, but still good for a few chortles. Still, I didn't get it. I kept waiting for the book to have a point, until I reached the last page and still didn't get it. I thought it was funny, even laugh-out-loud funny at times; but not hilarious or even uniformly entertaining. A novel can't sustain itself on humor alone, and the only other impetus driving me to turn the pages was an objective curiosity in what-happens-next. Now that I know what happens next, and am not impressed, I've lost all impetus. The ending left me confused and dissatisfied.

That said, for experimental fiction Catch-22 is immensely approachable. And several of my friends adore this book. The plot: Yossarian, a bombadier in presumably alter-world WWII, has lost his nerve. And he's even flown the required 45 missions--if he were in any other squadron but Colonel Cathcart's, he would have long been safely home. (SPOILER) So, after 450+ pages of random (often funny, but still bizarrely random) storyline, Yossarian decides to follow his good buddy Orr to Sweden. --That, seriously, is the entire plot of the novel. The events in between are largely irrelevant and never stuck in my mind, save for the unimportant details like Milo's complicated egg-market scheme in Malta (which I still don't quite understand).

And that's all I got, folks. Maybe you'll make more sense out of the catch.

Comments

[yhlee.livejournal.com]

Heh--I adored Catch-22, but it's fully possible that after a year of reading utter crap like Tess of the D'Urbervilles in the fiction category (I liked most of the poetry we read), I was so desperate that anything that didn't alienate me was bound to win me over.

Also, I kind of have a sick sense of humor, so it appealed on that front as well, even if, yeah, not as funny as Pratchett at his best.

[keilexandra]

Said friends who loved it can't explain WHY they love it--just that they do. So I guess it's a love/hate thing.

[mrissa.livejournal.com]

I think the randomness/surrealism is deliberate here. A more plotty plot would have undermined what Heller was trying to point out about the random and/or surreal nature of military service (or modern life itself).

[keilexandra]

Oh yes, I'm sure Heller meant the structure intentionally--and as an experimental novel, I think this succeeds--but the style didn't work for me as experimental novels tend not to. (HOUSE OF LEAVES is on my TBR shortlist, so we'll see how that goes.)

[beteio.livejournal.com]

If it helps, the chapters (and some scenes, I think) are not in chronological order, which makes it extremely hard to follow on the first time through. Which is why you should read it again ;)

[keilexandra]

If a book is does not fundamentally work on the first read, then it's not a good book (for me). Even Shakespeare, Chaucer, Rushdie (see my review of THE ENCHANTRESS OF FLORENCE) all offer a basic plot or emotional payoff on the surface. I got to the end of CATCH-22... and I still didn't care.