A brilliantly witty and cynical deconstruction of military bureaucracy. I found Catch-22 to be genuinely funny, though the style of humour did become somewhat repetitive. I actually laughed out loud often at the clever contractions and absurd conversations. However I did feel that the novel was a little too long-winded, especially considering the lack of plot. The point was made long before the end, with not much new ground covered. Still it was very clever, and a fun ride.

My relationship with this book was somewhat quixotic. The first few chapters made me smile- in a bitter, ironic, wise-at-life sort of way of course. I loved the cleverness and deceptive punch-you-in-the-side way that Heller made his points, wrapped up in the whirling, hilariously awful world that he's created in depicting a tired, worn out unit towards the end of WWII in Italy. The choice of the main character in the bombardier Yossarian, a man who saw one too many horrors, is perfect. His questioning, questionable state of mind is perfect to depict all the contradictions, paradoxes, hidden, buried ideas that nobody wants to talk about during a war, and the sheer absurdism of the life soldiers lived, even in our "good war" of the 20th century. One understands Heller's rage at the blind torpor of a society that prefers to be lead and blame someone else for what happens. This particular unit is under special strain, as their commander orders them to fly more combat missions than any other unit, and then continually raises the number each time his men see a glimpse of their time to go home. The endless, senseless, everyday cruelty inflicted both on their surroundings and on each other slowly grinds the unit's minds and bodies into dust.

I almost wonder if when this was published, Heller was afraid that his audience would be inclined to put this book down as quickly as possible. It was one of my issues with the book that he seemed to throw out all his major questions, issues, wild emotions and ultimate points within the first few chapters, so that for awhile afterwards, it did all seem very monotonously repetitive, as we saw more and more ways of saying exactly the same thing in pretty near exactly the same formula. Perhaps absurdism is merely more effective in short form, as there was a period of the book where I was rolling my eyes and seeing shades of Catcher in the Rye's blind "Fuck the man!" screaming enough to only grudgingly read on. I understand that it may have been part of his point to illustrate that the absurdism of war does go on and on and on, but it did become something of a chore to read in the middle. Deceptively light comedy can't go on like that without at least hints at some deeper pathos that we don't have to assume is there. Also, the attitude that Heller is espousing, and the earnest questions he asks do feel somewhat dated. Not their message, of course. That is universal. Questioning authority, the value of life, the cost of war, the meaning of country and honor and duty, etc. But there is a phrasing that places it firmly in its time, which does seperate you from it a bit. I also found it all somewhat bleak and cold in tone, and not in a way that I wanted to spend time with at all. This middle section would be the reason that it took me so long to finish this book.

However. After I passed the halfway mark, my opinion improved once more. The character drawing, while still absurd enough to bring a wry smile to my face, was poignant enough that I started to get more involved. I needed to see layers. I needed to see the inner roiling turmoil, I needed to see the thoughts of these desperate men as they went about their tragically ridiculous lives, and see what it was that made them survive, or finally give up. It also helped that we saw more to Yossarian to make him a fully fledged person, rather than merely a conduit for the major points of the book. Perhaps I'm not saying this correctly, but while I can react critically to a character who is presented as a symbol, I can't be truly drawn to reading more about them unless I'm presented with more to see. In any case, I thought the last half intermittently, and particularly the last hundred and fifty pages or so were absolutely heartbreaking. In the end, Heller does make you both grieve and rejoice, and the story fulfills the promise of what I had hoped that it would be after its manically brilliant introduction.

All in all, it is a novel absolutely worth its "classic," name. It is worth reading to remind you of the many different perspectives that are available on an issue, to think critically about even concepts that you've never had to question before. Nothing is given. It is always worthwhile to be reminded of that.

"Insanity is contagious."

Like so many other works of originally absurd or dystopian character, this classic catches up with reality faster than I can process. When I first shared Yossarian's frustration over the perfect catch, I did so in a quite abstract way, enjoying the intellectual game the novel kept me engaged in.

Now I find myself frequently thinking of his pain as something I experience myself, every day, reading news and listening to the authorities that are in charge to rule the world. If you want to succeed against the insanity of populist ruthlessness and to restore liberal values and democratic processes, you have to adopt the insane leaders' weapons, and turn yourself into a demagogue playing to the stupidity and insanity of the indoctrinated, thoughtless masses. But then, of course, you do not represent liberal values and democratic processes anymore, you turn into the monster you fight.

When Yossarian realised that he could only escape the threat to his life (the active participation in the war) if he was declared insane, and that expressing the wish to escape the threat to his life showed he was in fact sane, he knew he was in the clutches of insane authorities (which ironically therefore were safe from dying in the war for which they were responsible!). They were keeping their numbing power over him as long as he was sane enough to resist, and human enough to have a character:

"It was miraculous. It was almost no trick at all, he saw, to turn vice into virtue and slander into truth, impotence into abstinence, arrogance into humility, plunder into philanthropy, thievery into honor, blasphemy into wisdom, brutality into patriotism, and sadism into justice. Anybody could do it; it required no brains at all. It merely required no character."

As a novel showing the absurdity of war and of nationalism on an individual level, while keeping a (bittersweet) sense of humour, this labyrinth of a tale has no peer:

"The country was in peril; he was jeopardizing his traditional rights of freedom and independence by daring to exercise them."

So here is my catch, let's call it the catch 42 - the catch that kicks in whenever we try to find the Answer to Life, The Universe and Everything. If all insane leaders of the world read this book, they would understand the meaninglessness of their destructive power play, and they would change their ways and the world would finally be a safe place. The catch is that they have to be sane to read it.

So, read it if you are sane enough to understand it. It will drive you crazy though.

Insanity is contagious.

O man, it’s really crazy. I doubt if I could say anything revealing about Catch 22. It’s been ages I read it for the first time and it was like a breath of fresh air in a stale room. If you grew up in an oppressive country where mediocrity was a virtue and a lot of stuff banned, where many situations felt like infamous Catch 22, when it was safer just not saying about some things reading such absurd and grotesque stories allowed you, paradoxically, keep your common sense and ignore awkward reality.

Catch-22 is a satirical story about the unit of American bombardiers who in time of war are staying on the island of Pianosa on the Mediterranean Sea. The main character of the novel, Yossarian, is a man with morbid aversion to dying. And from the beginning, trying with every available way to get permission for return to the country, is on and on impeded by the title Catch-22.

Besides him we get to know a colourful collection of characters, to mention: major Major Major Major - like an anguish Henry Fonda, Orr with his cheeks like crab apples, Nately who had a bad start because came from a good family , Dunbarr, Texan who turned out to be good-natured, generous and likable. in three days no one could stand him and many, many others. Oh, and let's not forget about the mysterious soldier in white .

Novel is divided into chapters titled with the name of the person to whom it refers. And the best advantage of it is of course its humor and an huge dose of absurdity. In Catch 22 sane people are mistaken for madmen and lunatics for mentally healthy ones. But most of all this is a book that not only amuses the readers, it also, by ridiculing grotesque regulations, bureaucracy and pompous statements shows them the absurdity of the war and helps taming own demons and fears. And undeniably, Heller's black humor, sense of irony and drama are here perfectly mixed.

Absurdist plays are one act for a reason.

Seriously, I know there were points to make about the repetitive ridiculousness of bureaucracy/war/capitalism/life, but over 450 pages of variations on the Catch-22 joke?

I did find myself more affected than I would have guessed by some of the deaths, and some of the lines were clearly awesome.

Underlined bits:
In a world in which success was the only virtue, he had resigned himself to failure.(277, about the Chaplain)
Because he needed a friend so desperately, he never found one. (95, about Major Major)
Since he had nothing better to do well in, he did well in school. (95, about same)
Clevinger was one of those people with lots of intelligence and no brains, and everyone knew it except those who soon found it out. (77)
Kraft was a skinny, harmless kid from Pennsylvania who wanted only to be liked, and was destined to be disappointed in even so humble and degrading an ambition. (64)
it was neither possible nor necessary to educate people who never questioned anything(44)
In an airplane there was absolutely no place in the world to go except to another part of the airplane. (42)
Actually, there were many officer's clubs that Yossarian had not helped build, but he was proudest of the one on Pianosa. It was a sturdy and complex monument to his powers of determination. Yossarian never went there to help until it was finished; then he went there often, so pleased was he with the large, fine, rambling shingled building. It was truly a splendid structure, and Yossarian throbbed with a mighty sense of accomplishment each time he gazed at it and reflected that none of the work that had gone into it was his. (27)
There were terrifying, sudden moments when objects, concepts and even people that the chaplain had lived with almost all his life inexplicably took on an unfamiliar and irregular aspect that he had never seen before and which made them seem totally strange: jamais vu. (214)
"You put so much stock in winning wars," the grubby, iniquitous old man scoffed. "The real trick lies in losing wars, in knowing which wars can be lost. Italy has been losing wars for centuries, and just see how splendidly we've done nonetheless."(255)


Lots of repetitiveness, even in that short list.
Reminds me of Confederacy of Dunces. I feel I was bored and frustrated in a similar way, but probably won't reread either to search for actual parallels beyond obvious "supposedly hilarious classics I outright hated" classification.

I realize that CATCH 22 is said to be one of the greatest literary works of the twentieth century, but it was just not my cup of tea. I found it confusing at first and when I did sort out the storyline, had to force myself to stay with the repetition of it all. (Still worth 3 Stars though for its uniqueness.)

If you want to read a dark satire about the atrocities of war where a U.S. Army bombardier fights to retain his sanity in a world of contradictions, this 1961 classic is for you.

Maybe there's a reason this book is usually required high school reading; it reads like it was written by a 17-year old. Someone who clearly finds himself to be hilarious, and no one ever had the heart to tell him differently.

I never felt for any of the characters, I never laughed, I never cried. In fact, half way through the book I couldn't take it anymore, so I skipped ahead to the last chapter and yet it still made sense. I'm sorry, but if nothing happens in the second half of a book to impact the ending, then something is very wrong.

I know there are a lot of people out there who think this is one of the classics and that everyone should read it, but it just doesn't hold up to any of the classics I've read thus far. Hell, it doesn't even hold up to  Sheep in a Jeep.

REREAD

There are two satirical novels that readers tend to love or hate. They are: A Confederacy of Dunces and Catch-22. You can tell by my rating which camp I belong to.

Fue un flechazo.
En cuanto Yossarian vio al capellán se enamoró perdidamente de él.
Yossarian estaba en el hospital porque le dolía el hígado, aunque no tenía ictericia. A los médicos les desconcertaba el hecho de que no manifestara los síntomas propios de la enfermedad. Si la dolencia acababa en ictericia, podrían ponerle un tratamiento. Si no acababa en ictericia y se le pasaba, le darían de alta, pero aquella situación les tenía perplejos.

Unas pocas líneas y también yo pude decirlo: Fue un flechazo. No con el capellán, sí con Yossarian y con la novela en general, amor a primera línea. Pero este enamoramiento repentino no quita que, como los médicos, pasase también por algunos momentos de perplejidad.

Y por eso mismo, es una novela difícil de recomendar. La perplejidad, el enamoramiento y el humor absurdo no entusiasman a todo el mundo. Mucho menos si van los tres de la mano, pero el que tenga la suerte de enamorarse pasará una temporada maravillosa.

Trampa 22 es una de las novelas más influyentes del s. XX. Publicada en 1961, Joseph Heller comenzó a escribirla en 1953, basándose en parte en sus experiencias a bordo de un bombardero durante la Segunda Guerra Mundial.

Cuenta la historia de los integrantes de un escuadrón de bombarderos estadounidense en Pianosa, durante la Segunda Guerra Mundial. Los personajes (un montón, al principio puede parecer difícil seguir el hilo), excéntricos y surrealistas, son de los que no se olvidan. Especialmente Yossarian, el protagonista, un capitán de escuadrilla al que habían degradado porque ya no le importaba errar o no. Había tomado la decisión de vivir para siempre o morir en el intento, y cada vez que subía al avión su única misión era bajar vivo. Un héroe.

Por mucho que casi cada párrafo esté cargado de humor absurdo, el libro no lo es. Hay veces que desde el humor se critica todo mejor, y es mucho más llevadero, más fácil de explicar. Así, carga contra la guerra, contra el comportamiento de los altos mandos y su causa, de la otra causa, que muchos no entendían (¿Quién es España? ¿Qué es Hitler?), y del sinsentido de todo ello.
Eso se ve perfectamente en la propia Trampa 22, según la cual todo el que estuviera loco, sería dado de baja del servicio y enviado a casa, pero cualquiera que quiera abandonar el servicio no está realmente loco. Sólo había una trampa, y era la 22, que establecía que preocuparse por la propia seguridad ante peligros reales e inmediatos era un proceso propio de mentes racionales. Orr estaba loco y podían retirarlo del servicio, lo único que tenía que hacer era solicitarlo. Y en cuanto lo hiciera, ya no estaría loco y tendría que cumplir más misiones.

"I really do admire you a bit. You're an intelligent person of great moral character who has taken a very courageous stand. I'm an intelligent person with no moral character at all, so I'm in an ideal position to appreciate it." - Colonel Korn, Catch-22

I really appreciate it when a book respects the intelligence of its readership. If a book is going to be "experimental" in any way, I love those that throw you into a world with no explanations - a literary baptism of fire (ie: Orwell's "Animal Farm"). Catch-22 is one of those books, and that's part of the reason why I thought it was so amazing!

Catch-22 tells the story of a US Army squadron based in Italy during WWII, and a disenchanted pilot named Yossarian who thinks everyone is trying to kill him. (not an unreasonable assumption in a war) Except that it's not an Italy, a military story, or a world that we're meant to immediately recognize. There is a logic in the book that all the characters seem to accept, but that doesn't make sense to the reader. Or, alternately, it makes too much sense to the reader, and that's when the book hits you hard. You start falling into it. You start siding with people. Then all of a sudden, you realize that you're siding with the wrong people. You start thinking to yourself how could I be agreeing with this asshole?! How can I be laughing! My favorite books are the ones that elicit visceral reactions from me...my chest gets tight, my stomach gets tied in knots, and I can't explain why I'm reacting positively/negatively - I just know that I am. There were so many of those moments in this book, I can't even begin to describe them all...

One of the things that impressed me most was the structure of the book - how all at once it seemed both haphazard, and entirely calculated. How each segment could stand alone, but that together they weaved an intricate, thought-provoking story...
If you like historical novels, if you like political novels, if you like in-depth characters, if you like humor, if you like to think - I would highly recommend this book to you.

There was only one catch and that was Catch-22, which specified that a concern for one's safety in the face of dangers that were real and immediate was the process of a rational mind. Orr was crazy and could be grounded. All he had to do was ask; and as soon as he did, he would no longer be crazy and would have to fly more missions. Orr would be crazy to fly more missions and sane if he didn’t, but if he was sane he had to fly them. If he flew them he was crazy and didn't have to; but if he didn't want to he was sane and had to. Yossarian was moved very deeply by the absolute simplicity of this clause of Catch-22 and let out a respectful whistle.
...
Catch-22 did not exist, he was positive of that, but it made no difference. What did matter was that everyone thought it existed, and that was much worse, for there was no object or text to ridicule or refute, to accuse, criticize, attack, amend, hate, revile, spit at, rip to shreds, trample upon or burn up.

A couple of years ago, I bought the Pop Chart 100 Essential Novels Scratch-off Chart. Catch-22 is the 30th book I’ve read off that list. Set during World War II, primarily on a island off the coast of Italy, Catch-22 is an ensemble story of a group of soldiers caught up in an insane military bureaucracy. Some of them are crazy, and some have had craziness thrust upon them. The narrative bounces from character to character in a series of vignettes, and shifts back and forth in time. It’s not particularly plot-driven, though there is an overarching story we keep getting glimpses of throughout until it is fully explained in the final pages.

Catch-22 is a Classic, an Important work of Great Literature. But it’s not entertaining, unless you’re the kind of person who would enjoy 500 somewhat repetitive pages capturing the phrase “military intelligence is an oxymoron.” The book is full of contradictions like “Major Major never sees anyone in his office while he’s in his office” and “my only fault is that I have no faults.” It is comic but not funny. It’s neither a heroic nor a gritty war story but an absurdist one, a take that I’m not sure holds up today (though it is, occasionally, gory). And while it is unsurprising that the vast majority of characters were men, it was still jarring that pretty much every female character was simply a sex object, including the one referred to at least a hundred times simply as “Nately’s whore.”

It was impossible not to notice how heavily the TV show M*A*S*H borrowed from Catch-22, from the ensemble cast and vingette structure, to numerous similar characters, to the idea that Klinger’s attempt to get out of combat only reinforced the belief that he’s sane. But I’d argue M*A*S*H was a far better work of art because it examined a far wider range of emotions. Sure, there was the same sarcasm and anti-bureaucracy themes, but there was also joy, love, humor, fear. Catch-22 really only has one note to play, and I grew weary of it long before the book ended. In fact, I was rather like Nately’s whore, who “was bored and indifferent, and wanted very much to sleep.”

Single Quote Review:

"...even to laugh is only an imperfect expression of the real ridicule of life. For it to be perfect one ought properly to be serious.

The most perfect mockery of life would be if the person who propounded the deepest truth were not a dreamer but a doubter. And that isn’t inconceivable, for no one can propound the positive truth as excellently as a doubter, except that he himself doesn’t believe in it. If he were a hypocrite the joke would be on him; if he were a doubter who perhaps wanted to believe what he doubted, the mockery would be entirely objective, existence would be mocking itself through him; he would be propounding a doctrine able to explain everything and the whole race could repose in it, but this doctrine could not explain its own founder.

Were a person clever enough to conceal the fact of his own madness, he could make the whole world mad."

~ Kierkegaard