Catch-22

This is a terrible book that I shouldn't love. I love this book.

The narrative is all over the place and, at times, seemingly impossible to follow. The whole thing is confusing and shouldn't work. It works and I followed it all.

The characters are absurd, as is their dialogue. They are so ridiculously unbelievable, it's almost insulting that Heller expects to buy into them. I bought into them all.

Honestly, I can't imagine how hard it must have been to write a book that throws out contradictions with almost every sentence. Heller not only pulled it off, but the man had me outright laughing all through this book.

Seriously, none of this should work, yet somehow, Heller brings it all together and turns what could have been an incomprehensible show more mess into a funny, poignant, and ultimately extremely important work.

God, I love this book. show less

I liked it! Now, don’t get me wrong—this book is absolutely insane, but surprisingly, the more I read, the more it started to click. First things first: you can’t approach Catch-22 expecting a traditional story with a typical plot, because there’s nothing typical about it. It’s chaotic, has a nonlinear plot, and the writing style takes some getting used to. One reviewer even said the book seems to be about nothing, but I think that’s a bit off. Catch-22 has depth.

This book made me feel a range of emotions—rage, laughter, sadness, frustration. A lot of it is funny, but behind all the humor is this undercurrent of grief for the fallen comrades and frustration over the inability to escape the horrors of war. The story gets show more darker and darker, and by the end, you’re not laughing anymore. The book does run a bit long, but overall, I enjoyed it and came away with a completely different understanding of what war is like.

The chaos is overwhelming, but I think that’s exactly the point Heller is making about war. It’s senseless, chaotic, and ultimately, about nothing at all. You find yourself going a little crazy trying to make sense of it, but in the end, there’s no reasoning.

My favorite quote:

“Some men are born mediocre, some men achieve mediocrity, and some men have mediocrity thrust upon them. With Major Major it had been all three. Even among men lacking all distinction he inevitably stood out as a man lacking more distinction than all the rest, and people who met him were always impressed by how unimpressive he was.” show less

There's two books I'll re-read over and over again. This is one.

The neurosis inherent in life itself is laid bare, and it all leads up to a revelation so pure, so simple, that to present it without those trappings would belittle the meaning. It's as if the entire novel is the lead up to a punchline, but instead of laughing you're supposed to live.

Catch-22 is one of the finest "war books" ever written, and one of the most moving, despite the fact that it also an absolutely hilarious read. The early sections of the novel introduce the absurdism that drives the novel and the humorous tone of the book. Yet, the reader is consistently reminded of the horrors that lurk outside (such as the death of Snowden, frequently mentioned but only explained in the penultimate chapter). By the time the book gets to its grim late stages, the absurdity has shifted from the source of humor to the source of tragedy and wasteful treatment of human life.

Though I speak of the absurdity in the singular, there are a number of critiques in Heller's novel. One is the initial definition of "Catch-22." show more Catch-22 is the principle that a soldier can only be sent home if he is insane. If you ask to be sent home, however, then you are clearly sane. The main character, Yossarian, is caught in this principle, realizing as he does that "people are trying to kill me." Yossarian puts war in the starkest possible terms, people he does not know want to murder him. His only option is to murder people he does not know. Why should he fly missions, and risk being killed by these people?

The standard answer is "for principle." Catch-22 aims to undermine this reply, and sustain Yossarian's observations about the fundamental absurdity of war. It turns out that it is not only the Germans who are trying to kill him, but the bureaucratic machinations of the U.S. Army that is doing it, such as Colonel Cathcart's demand for more missions, and more dangerous missions, to increase his own prestige. Yossarian is not fighting for principle, he is fighting for his commanding officers and their motives, and these motives are rarely noble. Heller illustrates that the overriding principle that may justify the war (he avoids the justification for the war itself) has little to do with the risks that the soldiers must undertake.

While there are a host of anti-war novels one can select from, none relish in the absurdity of the conflict better than Catch-22. Remarque, for example, is surely among the best in showing the consequences of war. The question that one faces after reading Remarque is: could any conflict be worth these terrible costs? The question one asks after reading Heller is somewhat different: why would anyone think that war is a sensible thing to do in the first place? Engaging with these questions is enough to make the novel worth reading.

This is not, however, the lone virtue of the novel. The novel is masterfully constructed. It reads in many places as if it were written in a stream of consciousness style, with chapters shifting from scene to scene, in different times and places, and the novel is also not linear. Yet, the novel is subtly structured so that it is never disorganized or difficult to follow (except in the scenes where the discussion is deliberately hard to follow, see Milo Minderbender!). Indeed, it is a real joy to read, feeling at once both spontaneous and ingeniously crafted.

In Yossarian, the Chaplain and Milo Minderbender, we are treated to three brilliant characters is a entertaining ensemble. Yossarian's madness is reason in a world of absurdity, while the Chaplain is the recognizable man, foibles and all. Milo is the capitalist, who runs the syndicate to ruthlessly (and successfully) turn a profit. From feeding the men chocolate covered cotton to bombing his own squadron, he represents single-minded pursuit of the bottom line. He's the perfect combination of hilarity and thought-provoking challenge (namely about the relationship between ethics and economic efficiency).

Catch-22 brilliant interweaves scenes which are moving, scenes which are thoughtful and scenes which are hilarious. No personal library is complete without it. show less

The book is written as an associative, non-chronological and rather irreverent set of events taking place in and around a bomber base off the coast of Italy in WW-II.

The first time I've read it, I was actually, as the saying goes, ROTFL.

5/5 for writing style, originality, characters.

Where the book gets its 6th star is that out of this ridiculous compendium of far-fetched events is assembled a very powerful anti-war narrative.

"Man was matter, that was Snowden’s secret. Drop him out a window and he’ll fall. Set fire to him and he’ll burn. Bury him and he’ll rot, like other kinds of garbage. That was Snowden’s secret. Ripeness was all."

And this, in a funny book.

Joseph Heller was once asked how come he was never able to write show more anything else remotely as good as Catch-22.

His reply: "Well neither has anyone else!"

Boom. show less

a dense and sophisticated book with very dry, deadpan humor; sometimes absurdist but always grounded in gritty reality. the near-surreal tone puts the dark parts of the story into razor sharp relief more eloquently than any straight forward drama. the “timing” is impeccable and Heller’s own experience flying bombing missions in WWII creates a first-person effect where an off-handed, casually intimate knowledge of these people and their doings is built like it’s taking place right in front of you. the storytelling is almost conversational and perhaps should be read out loud to best effect. like a Monty Python skit.

i get whiffs of Hofstadterian strange loops, Godelian flights of logic, and tongue tips insistently palpating the show more inner lining of the buccal. the text itself could said to be subversive in the way that Robert Anton Wilson called his style of writing “guerilla ontology” wherein ideas that you don’t know are there are there, nonetheless, and affect you, nonetheless. the theme of the book repeats itself in different forms on different levels: story-wide, individual characters, scenes, and even sentences. the book is definitely a bit trippy and can be seen as one long Zen koan.

Heller turns characters on their heads, leads you down familiar paths only to find out it’s nowhere you’ve ever been, and slowly transmogrifies the silly, whimsical nature of what you’re reading into gut-wrenching, hopeless, abject horror before your very eyes. yes, i said that.

the book is a masterpiece; a ruthless invective of the military, war, society, and some of our own preconceptions. and the meaning of life, to boot. show less

You can say all you want about non-linear narratives and free-association and black satire, but Jesus Christ if this supposedly comic book wasn't an absolute chore to read. Having heard so much praise for it, at first I was disappointed and thought that perhaps it was just the usual case of heightened expectations for a modern classic. Catch-22 has become an archetype for much subsequent comic fiction, so perhaps, I thought, like many such ground-breaking works it looks tame in retrospect.

But after a hundred or so pages of this swampy, bloated, repetitive prose, with many hundreds more to go, it just became a chore. It is verbose but surprisingly unquotable. Its many characters have little to differentiate them, and none are as show more interesting as Heller seems to think. It has no plot but despite that it is incredibly long, and yet doesn't seem to say anything at all beyond 'war is crazy, people are crazy' in a rather unsubtle and juvenile way.

There are more subtle things going on, but the non-linear narrative and the fractured set-up of jokes are the sort of things that you can only really identify if you read the CliffNotes or re-read the book closely more than a few times. And when the first time of reading is so barely tolerable, what sort of sane person would go for a second, or third, or fourth, just to be able to notice some oh-so-clever literary techniques? Catch-22 is one for the pseuds and the posturers, and for the madmen. And if there are those who can truly stomach it and are not just posturing – well, I raise a glass. show less