Who is "You"; the Second Person Used in Catcher in the Rye

 Who is “You”?


Opening Catcher in the Rye, we, the readers, are jarred when it opens: “If you really want to hear about it,”(Salinger 1). Throughout this book, Holden Caufield speaks directly to us, to me, but mostly to “you”. So, who is this “you”? Are we to presume he’s speaking with us? Are we to presume we’re witnessing his conversation with someone else? Personally, I believe he’s speaking with…you’ll find out at the end of this blog post.

If you open the book to chapter one, then go back two pages, you’ll see the book is dedicated “To My  Mother”. Despite the similarities between J.D. Salinger and Caufield, I don’t think this is a Caufield dedication, I don’t think he’s speaking to his mother. Throughout this book he describes the people he’s talking about, never once has he encountered this person in the story. In other words, if it were D.B., he wouldn’t have introduced him as “I mean that’s all I told D.B. about, and he’s my brother and all,” (Salinger 1). From this introduction to D.B. we can derive two things: 1, He’s not talking to D.B. 2, We, the reader, might know D.B., as he’s offhandedly saying “that’s all I told D.B. about,” not formally introducing him. So, who would know D.B.? That’s a long list, including his ex, so let’s rephrase that. Who would know D.B. that Holden would talk to? His mother, Allie, his father, and Phoebe. Now, we need to narrow it down to people he didn’t talk to in the book; not Phoebe. Allie, his mother, his father. 

Process of elimination, let’s inspect our options; Allie, mom, and dad. When Stradlater asks Holden to write his essay, he writes it about his late brother, Allie, saying: “He’s dead now. He got leukemia and died when we were up in Maine…” (Salinger 43) Because he introduces his brother as “He” and explains his death to us/ “you” I doubt he’s speaking with Allie. Now, his mother and father… Throughout the book he refers to them in the third  person, so it’s not them. Eg: “I was afraid my parents…” (Salinger 192)

So, who could it be? What if it was Holden? Talking to himself, writing himself a journal, because he ended up in some sort of institution, and you know how psychiatrists say to write it out or something? What if it was that? I think not. On the last page of the book, the last sentence of the second to last chapter, he says: “God, I wish you could’ve been there,” (Salinger 234) in reference to seeing Phoebe have fun on the carousel in the rain. He’s likely speaking with Allie when he says this, who else? Really, I don’t know. 

My last consideration is that this is fluid. Every time he’s speaking, he’s speaking to someone new. Or it just is too fluid to really know.


Revision:
I looked back to when Phoebe was first spoken of and he formally introduced us (Salinger 75). Why would "you" love her? How does he know? Is it fluid? Or is it simply, actually, us. Who are we?

Comments

  1. HarmonyFebruary 2, 2026 at 9:06 AM

    "Who is 'you'?" "Who are we?" Deep questions here. But in all seriousness, It's interesting to consider who Holden is addressing; my favorite theory is that he's speaking to Allie. Unfortunately, as you point out, Holden introduces Allie...which would be weird if he was talking to Allie. I think it'd be strange if it was anyone in the book, since Holden (as you point out :D) always introduces or mentions them to us as if they are...well, not us. I like the theory that who he's addressing is fluid--always yammering on to someone in his life, depending on the situation. Great JOB!

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Nudity, Girlhood, and the Child Within; How Little Girl becomes Evelyn Nesbit's Inner Child

       The concept of the inner child is one often explored by therapists, modern media, and online life gurus living out of their vans. This very same concept of the inner child; unresolved childhood traumas becoming formative elements of adults’ lives, is explored through Evelyn Nesbit’s relationship with Little Girl. Evelyn Nesbit is the exact character who would need a strong inner child, as she had been exploited from a young age, and continuously exploited since.       On page 42, Evelyn steps out of her car after her chauffeur opens the door for her, and kneels down in front of Little Girl. After a description of the little girl’s appearance, we are given two sentences back to back. “She gazed at Evelyn without curiosity.  She was the most beautiful child Evelyn had ever seen,” (Doctorow 42). This sequence– a description of the girl’s qualities, ending in a short sentence about her not recognizing Evelyn, swiftly followed by Evelyn’s a...
Read more

The Ultimate Performative Male; Lee Oswald as Depicted in “Libra”

Image
The term “Performative male”– a man who performs for women as women’s ideal man to get gratification and often sex– is a term utterly befitting of Lee Oswald’s character in “Libra”. In his case however, instead of performing for physical gratification, he performs for emotional gratification and a sense of superiority that keeps his sly smirk on his face. His audience in his performance is everyone, but he feels superior to those who don’t understand him, and recognized by those who do; other communists.  From the start of the novel, we see a severely dyslexic Lee attempt to read the massive “Das Kapital” and other books to show off his elite communism. This initial performance is met by a non-understanding audience. Nobody gets him. He’s not like other Americans. This lack of understanding/pushback does however bring him a sense of superiority because he is unique in his community. Later, we see him join the marines, with the manual memorized, being a know-it-all. But gratificatio...
Read more

Kindred could not have ended any other way; the power of being unpredictable and inevitable.

Kindred is a novel in which you spend a lot of time wanting to read ahead– finish just another page– to get over the cliffhanger. Nonetheless, there’s an inevitable quality to the novel’s conclusion, and really everything that happens. Of course Rufus didn’t send Dana’s letters to Kevin. Of course Dana had to use her knife. Of course Rufus had to die. Of course Hagar was born. Chekhov’s gun has to go off once introduced; and it always does. The inevitability of this novel’s events are due to foreshadowing. However, thanks to distractions, the readers are kept guessing on what’s to come, and the novel stays unpredictable.  The book ended with a few main conclusions: Dana survived, Hagar was born (of rape no less), Dana had to use her knife, Rufus wanted Dana, and the others were not free. All of these conclusions felt inevitable. For Dana’s knife, it’s almost like Chekhov’s gun in the sense that once it was presented, as well as the dangers that told her she could face it (42-43...
Read more