Unpopular opinion: That "classic" 1950s novel everyone loves is actually pretty flat when you dig into it

I was reading a book club breakdown online last week and found out that The Catcher in the Rye was initially panned by some major critics. The New York Times review from 1951 straight up called it "a slim volume" with shallow character development. That surprised me because I always figured it was an instant classic from day one. Turns out it took years for the book to get the reputation it has now. Has anyone else checked out old reviews of books we consider untouchable today?

2 comments

2 Comments

spencer_ross17d ago

No way, the NYT straight up called it shallow? I always thought that book was sacred, didn't realize it had to claw its way up like that.

betty_scott1817d ago

Heard a podcast once that said critics were brutal on it at first.