Yes, I know that it's a great satire novel, yes, the humor was on top sometimes. But I suffered through the novel even though the narration by Jay O. Sanders was really great!

„Параграф 22“ е ужасяваща амалгама, люшкаща се между трагичното и смешното, с една-единствена глава, която описва изцяло откровено отблъскващата и неподправена картина на резултатите от безумието, назовано „война“. В останалата си част книгата представлява съшита от различни гледни точки история, на моменти нестройно лъкатушеща между минало и настояще, без особено отличима граница, в която по-скоро иронично са описани стремежите, копнежите, опитите за оцеляване, прекарването на свободното време, изпълнено с тежко очакване (ненапразно не споменавам думата „надежда“) на персонажите. На фона на военните действия се вихри студенокръвен кариеризъм, безумно мащабна бюрокрация и изтръпваща алчност. Разбира се, те са добронамерено прикрити от хората, които ги упражняват, под евфемистични епитети като „възход за родината“, „чест“ и „дял за всички“.

Докато някой се качва на самолета, за да извърши последния си боен полет и да стане на хрускави розови останки във въздуха, друг долу размишлява истински напрегнато на кого от двамата мразещи се членове на висшия команден състав да се хареса повече. Човешките животи са не повече от клишираните съболезнователни писма, които следва да се изпратят на опечалените близки, а броят на задължителните извършени полети трябва непрекъснато да се увеличава – не за победата на родината във войната, разбира се – просто за да се спечели преднина пред генерала на съседната авиочаст, предвидил по-малък брой полети за своята група. А, да – и е добре когато самолетите пускат бомбите над целта, да ги пускат по-близо една до друга – разбирате ли, така стават хубави въздушни снимки, които могат да бъдат поместени в Saturday Evening Post. Така и не се разбрах със себе си кой беше по-голям гад – Каткарт, който пращаше хората на безсмислена смърт за собствен кеф или Майлоу, който в крайна сметка заряза спасяването на едно малко момиче заради контрабанден тютюн.

Това е книга за лудостта – за лудостта на лудите, за в пъти по-дълбоката лудост на нормалните. В романа на Джоузеф Хелър Смъртта е неописан персонаж, който си няма собствена глава, но е винаги с всички, седи на земята и си тананика нелепа песничка, чакайки да ѝ дойде времето. И те го чувстват. Книга за това какво правиш, когато си изправен пред неизбежното. Някои се влюбват и намират в това смисъла – и умират. На някои не им пука – и също умират. Други се побъркват от страх и са готови на всичко от отчаяние – и в крайна сметка пак умират. А има и такива, които успяха да доплуват до Швеция и да оживеят – странно, но подобни неща също се случват...

В края за по-несхватливите читатели Хелър съвсем откровено си е казал за какво е идело реч през цялото време. За момент нещата стават по-истински, по-малко сюрреалистични и вече не ти се струва, че си попаднал в някакъв „просто шеметен фарс“ от безумни думи и действия. Войната е гнусна и оголена до окървавен, наръфан кокал, и хвърлена в лицето ти. И ти се ще, точно сега, поне за момент да вярваш, че ще има възмездие. Дори думите „Не можеш да отнемеш живота на едно човешко същество и да ти се размине безнаказано, дори когато това същество е бедна слугиня “ го вещаят. Защото те не са валидни само за конкретния случай, а ти се иска да смяташ, че всички ония, които са отнели надеждите и бъдещето на подчинените си, също ще си получат заслуженото. Но „имаше само една засечка... и това беше параграф 22“.
Е, някаква надежда накрая все пак има. Иначе не би имало смисъл.

I originally read this about 15 years ago. When I joined Goodreads and added the books I had previously read I remembered it as a 3 star book. I am not sure if it is being 15 years older or the fact that I did the audiobook this time, but it was easily 5 stars now!

The first thing that came to mind after I was a few chapters into this was the show “Seinfeld”. Always touted as a show about nothing, this book was kind of about nothing. It is series of smaller anecdotes, usually somewhat silly, that really don’t have a specific function in moving the plot. It is a satire about war, red tape, chain of command, etc. and the inherent futility involved. While war and the tragedy that goes with it are usually not considered amusing, this feels like a therapeutic, tongue-in-cheek poke that needed to be made to maintain sanity.

There are a plethora of characters – some of which are more caricatures – that may get your head spinning at first. Luckily, Heller gives them all memorable names which helps keep them organized easily. Maybe that was not his intention, but when you need to remember if it was Milo Minderbender or Major Major Major Major (yes, that is his name – my spell check did not like me repeating a word four times!) who did something, the reader is definitely given naming tools to keep them connected!

I mentioned that there is not necessarily an overall story, but there are definitely themes. One is doing what is best for you no matter who gets stepped on in the process. Another is twisting the facts to make sure the ultimate outcome is what works best for you. And, of course, the BIG idea that has become a common colloquialism (I know I use it just about every day) is the situation of Catch-22. Early in the book, the first example of Catch-22 is that if you say you want to fly bombing missions, you must be crazy so they will take you off the missions – only someone crazy would want to fly missions. But, if you are not on the missions, your sanity is no longer in question so they will make you fly them. If you say you don’t want to fly them, you are sane so you will have to fly them. Basically, no matter how you feel about flying missions, you will end up flying them anyway! Situations like this are repeated throughout the book where there is no good answer to the situation at hand – often with hilarious and frustrating results.

Now, I mention that the book is humorous satire, but it does have many dark moments as well. This kind of goes back to my mention of the discourse within the novel being therapeutic. War is crazy and what can happen is brutal. Oddly enough, a Jimmy Buffett quote from Changes in Latitudes, Changes in Attitudes comes to mind: “If we weren't all crazy we would go insane.” That pretty much sums up the book in a nutshell!

So, should you read this book? Well, I think that question is a Catch-22 in itself. I think about 50% of the people who try this will hate it or dnf it. I think the other 50% of the people who read it will love it, quote it, put it on their favorites list. Where the Catch-22 is that I think any person has the capability to be in either category depending on where their mindset is right now. If I recommend it to you now you may hate me, or you may thank me profusely. In 10 years is would be visa versa! I do think the audiobook helped me appreciate it more and it is now in my favorites. Will that happen for you? I definitely cannot be the one to decide that!

Josep Heller'in "Muhakkak okunması gereken 100 kitap" içinde olması dikkatimi çekmişti. Açık konuşmak gerekirse "bugüne kadar yazılmış en iyi traji-komik, taşlama eser" denmesi fazla abartılı gelmişti. İlk 100 sayfada zorlandığımı, abartıya olan inancımın yükseldiğini hissettim. İşin içinde askeri bir takım yerler, nesneler, kişiler olması da beni biraz bunalttı fakat, fakat belli bir noktadan sonra yazarın ne demek istediğine, diline, anlatımına, kurgularına alışınca elimden düşüremez oldum. 618 sayfa nereye gitti anlamadım. Muhakkak yazar, ne yapmak istediği, neleri amaçladığı ve başardığını bilen başka dostlar olacaktır. Kısacası hem Joseph Heller hem de "Madde 22"yi tanımak keyifliydi. Memnunum.

Have patience with this book, trust me you will be rewarded.

*3.5 stars*

The Absurdity of Bureaucracy
17 December 2015

tWell, the one thing that you can say about this book is that it introduced a new phrase into the English language – Catch-22, which basically means that you are damned if you do and damned if you don't. If we are to say that this is its only achievement then I have to say that it is one pretty awesome achievement because it seems to have pretty much become a staple of our language. In fact people who have never even read the book, let alone heard of it, probably know of and use the phrase. The thing is that upon this second reading of this book I have come to realise that it has not only has it coined a much used phrase into our language, but it has also have a significant impact upon modern literature. Okay, I might be wrong, but I would go as far as suggesting that Hitchhikers Guide to the Galaxy, Red Dwarf, and even The Simpsons, have been heavily influenced by the book (as well as Kurt Vonnegut, though he was more of a contemporary of Heller).

tBefore I continue I am going to have to warn you that there will be spoilers. If you are reading this review because you want to know whether to read this book or not then I will simply tell you to stop reading this review right now, grab a copy of the book, and read it instead. The fact that it has coined a much used phrase simply goes to prove that it is a part of the canon of modern American literature. Seriously, you don't need a review to convince you to read this book because simply want to find out whether you want to read this book or not is evidence enough that you should read this book.

tAnyway, now that all of the people that have not read this book are no longer reading this review (I hope) I can now start talking about the content of this book without worrying that it is going to spoil it for anybody. So, if I were to categorise this book I would, without hesitation, refer to it as absurdist literature in the vein of Waiting for Godot. Okay, Samuel Beckett isn't funny, but this book is, but that doesn't necessarily mean that absurdist literature falls into either category – it can be comedy - and in the same vein it can be quite serious. So, while Catch-22 is absolutely hilarious, it uses comedy it expose the hopelessness and meaninglessness of modern society as well as the stupidity of modern bureaucracy.

tAs I was reading this book I resisted the temptation to jump to a couple of other websites (Wikipedia and Sparknotes) to see what they had to say about the themes that are evident in this book, namely because I wanted to work it out for myself. I ended up giving into temptation and going to Sparknotes (which is supposed to be the internet version of the Cliff Notes) and discovered that I had indeed worked it out for myself. However, I do have to point out that while Spark Notes is trying to paint itself as this hip and cool place for school students to go to study their highschool texts, when I read the commentary on Catch-22 I have to say that I found it really dry and boring. In fact I reckon they should sack the guy that writes their notes and hire some of the Goodreads reviewers because we would end up creating much better content than the people they are currently paying.

tSo, what is the theme of the book? I can sum it up in one simple work – bureaucracy. In fact the whole premise of the book is the absurdity of the bloated bureaucracy. I remember watching a movie back in the 90s called The Net where everybody was pretty much enslaved to what the computer said. If the computer said something then it had to be true simply because the computer doesn't lie. Well, that may be the case but the computer is also as stupid as the person who is entering the information, and to be honest with you there are a lot of stupid people entering information into computers these days. For example here in Australia they have this register called the Written Off Vehicle Register (WOVR). If a vehicle has been entered into that register then it has basically been written off and is not allowed to be driven on the road. So, if you have this perfectly fine car that has nothing wrong with it, and somebody accidentally enters the rego (license) plate onto the WOVR, then it doesn't matter whether your car is roadworthy or not, as far as anybody is concerned (namely the police) it shouldn't be on the road. Don't even ask me about the hassle you have to go through to get your car removed from that register.

tThe thing is that bureaucracy is as smart as the stupidest clerk in the room, and we see this time and time again. For instance Yossarian moves the bombing line on the map, and all of a sudden everybody believes that the allies have scored a significant victory. Another example is that one of the main characters, who hates flying, but has to clock up a number of hours, is placed on a list of people on a plane, despite the fact that he isn't on the plane. So, when the plane crashes everybody believes that he is dead, despite his protestations to the contrary. It doesn't matter what he says, or does, because is name was on that piece of paper, and because the plane crashed, he is now officially dead.

tThe way time is construed in this book is really interesting. For most of the book the action is set in this almost timeless universe. It is as if nothing changes – at all. In fact we find ourselves constantly jumping backwards and forwards in time to various events. Heller doesn't use the strict timeline that most authors use because he is creating this timeless aspect of it - much like Groundhog Day. Nothing changes and everything goes on as it has gone on before. The only way that we know that we have jumped forward, or backward, in time is the number of missions that the soldiers have to fly. However as we get to the end of the book, and the main characters begin to die off, time suddenly starts to become important and we start to move forward. It is as if things are starting to change, and the world that we had become used to, where everybody goes about their lives, is no longer there. It is as if we are longing to return to that Groundhog Day because everything is familiar. All of the sudden those characters that we have grown to know and love are no longer there and the world, bleak as it was beforehand, becomes ever more bleaker.

tThe final thing that I wish to note about this novel is that it is very character centric. Each of the chapters (with the exception of I believe three) are named after specific characters, and have these characters as the main focus. However, while the focus may be on a specific character we always have Yossarian and his mates intruding into the chapters to remind us that there is cohesion to the novel. The main protagonist is Yosarian, a soldier who no longer wants to go up in a plane, namely because of one disastrous mission that he went on, and is in and out of hospital, looking for ways to be able to get home. This is where Catch-22 comes into the picture because we are told that to get into hospital you must have a fear of something, but if you fear death, which is the basis of most fears, and because it is natural to fear death, then there is nothing wrong with you, so you must fly more missions.

tIt isn't the story that makes this book – there is none – it is the characters, and I have to say that the characters are truly great characters, such as Major Major, who was born with the last name Major, was given the first name Major by his father, and then discovered that he had the middle name Major, and because of a smart-alek computer, was promoted to Major on the first day of joining the army. So, having the title Major Major Major Major he cannot be promoted, or demoted, because there is only one Major Major Major Major in the entire US army and nobody is going to do anything the jeopardise that.

tAnyway, I could go on, but I think I have written enough, and will leave with only one thing – if you haven't read this book then go and read it because you really don't know what you are missing.

For those who are interested I have written an blog post exploring this ideas much deeper.

“Just because you are paranoid does not mean that they are not after you.”



I have high-functioning anxiety, I’ve had it for most of my life: I can usually manage it pretty well, but it has the oddest side-effects sometimes. I first read “Catch 22” when I was going through a very serious high anxiety period, and I’ve noticed over the years that when that happens, I will read at more or less my normal pace, but I will then immediately forget the book as soon as I am done with it. It’s as if my brain’s capacity to record thing just short circuits – and this was pre-Goodreads, so I wasn’t taking notes or sharing thoughts about books with anyone, so there was nothing for my memory to hold on to.

My husband loves this book so much, and he was baffled when I told him that I couldn’t remember much about it, that I hadn’t really found it good or funny. Earlier this year, we watched the miniseries on Hulu and I decided I had to re-read it. Because it was a great story, and it was funny, and it was weird: all the things I like! And now I am really ticked off at my anxiety for just erasing this from my brain, because barely 10 pages in and I was giggling and shaking my head.

This episodic novel is the tale of woe of young Captain Yossarian, a bombardier in the 256th US Army Air Squadron: he and his squadron are based on a small island in Italy, at the tail-end of World War II, and they are all, in their own way, going crazy. Yossarian is trying to use his slow descent into insanity as a way out of active service – but anyone who is able to file a request for relief of duty on the basis of insanity is considered of sound mind, so such requests are never actually granted.

This Kafkaesque anti-war book features a broad cast of characters all coping with their circumstances in odd ways. And they are all, in their weird ways, kind of endearing and kind of detestable. I don’t know how one can summarize a novel like this adequately, but let’s just say that corruption, war profiteering and forgery are part of this story, as well as love, grief and the very real trauma that many men lived through during this very violent period of history.

It’s a tough book to read, because the narrative is non-linear and all over the place, but you have to trust Heller: this isn’t messy, this is done very deliberately, and by the end, the final pieces of the puzzle fall into place and paint the full picture of why this squadron is as crazy as it is. I don’t think it’s a perfect novel: it drags in places, and some jokes get a bit repetitive, but that is also done on purpose, to give the readers a sense of the tedium experienced by the characters. Even with its flaws, though, I think this book easily falls into the mandatory reads pile, because its skillful illustration of the absurdity and violence of war, and of the bureaucratic morass that is the military industrial complex is a relevant and important subject, as is the effect of such events on the mental health of people who go through it. Coincidentally, I was reading it during Remembrance Day… It put a bit of a different spin on this holiday, but I think it was a good perspective to have.

Very recommended, as is the Hulu series – though the different ending changes the tone of the overall story a little bit.

Catch 22- If you are crazy, insane, then you are grounded from flying anymore combat missions. However, if you apply for this status, then you are deemed to be too rational to be insane, so you are denied the request. That's the gist of the idea, and it is so applicable to so many situations in life that the term has been added into our everyday language.

Catch 22 is a satire, but not just any satire; it is the mother of all satires. And it doesn't just poke at the US military, it pokes at everyone, everywhere, everyday, at the way we accept the status quo, not questioning the absurdity of some of the rules of society.

Capt. John Yossarin takes the moral high ground in his view of life, except maybe for sex; he is somewhat morally deficient when it comes to sex. But he understands the absurdity of Catch22, he just can't convince anyone else.

This novel is pure genius, that's not to say perfect. It's a bit too long, and it's overly repetitive in some scenes, but that was Heller's intent, his way of driving home his points. I give it 4.5 stars, 9/10. Almost perfect, just not quite.

“…there was the educated Texan from Texas who looked like someone in Technicolor and felt, patriotically, that people of means—decent folk—should be given more votes than drifters, whores, criminals, degenerates, atheists and indecent folk—people without means… The Texan turned out to be good-natured, generous and likable. In three days no one could stand him.”

The people you serve with in the military aren’t really any different than the people you work with in any other place of employment. There are the over-achievers and the slackers, the creative thinkers and the conformists, the control freaks and the contrarians. At its core, the folks at USN and USMC are virtually indistinguishable from the folks at IBM and AT&T. The key dissimilarity is in the distribution of ineptitude. Unlike most civilian workplaces, incompetent individuals cannot be easily terminated and the competent individuals, in the presence of arduous ineptitude, cannot just quit and walk away.

The Peter Principal [Laurence J. Peter, 1969] theorizes that a competent person will be promoted until they reach a level where they are no longer competent and there they will stay. Thus complete equilibrium would be reached when all parties are promoted to their uniquely individual levels of incompetence—enter Joseph Heller’s Catch-22.

“You see? You have no respect for excessive authority or obsolete traditions. You’re dangerous and depraved, and you ought to be taken outside and shot!”

Heller is a genius. He raises sophistry to an elegant art form. I don’t think I have ever encountered a novel which better illustrates the frustrating and degrading elements of military service. Sure it’s exaggerated and circular and often repetitive, but that is all part Heller’s panorama-of-paradox, his symphony-of-satire. This is complex brilliance put forth in simple paper & ink.

For the Celebrity Death Match Review Tournament, The Count of Monte Cristo (15) versus Catch-22

Nately's whore had nearly managed to kill Yossarian on her second attempt that day, and he felt he needed a drink to steady his nerves. He went into the bar and found Milo Minderbinder staring disconsolately into a rum-and-coke.

"How's tricks, Milo?" asked Yossarian, when he couldn't stand the brooding silence any longer.

"The Dantès deal fell through," said Milo in a tone of utter misery.

"Tell me more," said Yossarian, against his better judgment.

"It seemed so straightforward," said Milo bitterly. "He wants revenge on this guy he has unfinished business with. Think he got framed or something... anyway, I wasn't interested in the details. It was nice and simple. I divert a bombing mission from Naples to this place in France, he gave me precise coordinates, and I was going to get a bag of high-quality gemstones. I even saw them."

"So what went wrong?" asked Yossarian.

"I should have known it was too easy," Milo continued. "I paid off General Scheisskopf with a deal on two extra parades. I though I'd have to go up to four, but he agreed to two. Major Major Major Major just signed the papers without even reading them. And then..."

"Then what?" asked Yossarian, intrigued despite himself.

"Then those idiots fly into fog, lose their bearings, panic, and just drop their payload without checking where they are. Somehow they happen to be right over Dantès's house. He was blown to bits, and he was the only person who knew where he'd stashed the gems. It was a million to one. A billion. I'll never get another opportunity like it. Never."

"You've still got the Egyptian cotton," said Yossarian.

"That's true," said Milo, brightening up a little. "Thanks Yossarian, you're a friend." He paid for both their drinks and went out to check if cotton futures had gone up again.

n  What is a country? A country is a piece of land surrounded on all sides by boundaries, usually unnatural. Englishmen are dying for England, Americans are dying for America, Germans are dying for Germany, Russians are dying for Russia. There are now fifty or sixty countries fighting in this war. Surely so many countries can't all be worth dying for.n

This brilliant piece of absurdist humor, with its circular reasoning and twisted logic that lampoons not just war but society in general, hit America in the gut at exactly the right time, with the Baby Boomer generation coming of age and the Vietnam conflict about to seriously escalate. Set in the encampment of a small bomber group on a tiny Italian island during the waning years of WWII, the story bounces back and forth through a stupendously large cast of unforgettable characters, drunkenly ricocheting through time to tell the story of one man's attempt to survive. The humor abruptly vanishes from time to time which makes the serious parts even more impactful, not unlike this book's spiritual cousin, Slaughterhouse-Five by Kurt Vonnegut Jr..