Reviews with content warning for Injury/Injury detail - Catch-22

Reviews tagging 'Injury/Injury detail'

Catch-22 by Joseph Heller

20 reviews

loverboy's review against another edition

Go to review page

dark funny tense slow-paced

Plot- or character-driven? A mix
Strong character development? It's complicated
Loveable characters? Yes
Diverse cast of characters? No
Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes

5.0

Content Warnings

nnannanna's review against another edition

Go to review page

challenging dark slow-paced

Plot- or character-driven? A mix
Strong character development? It's complicated
Loveable characters? No
Diverse cast of characters? No
Flaws of characters a main focus? No

2.0

I get the point of the book. I finally liked what I was reading at chapter 39. The book is a satiricak telling of men fighting in a fictional war in a fictional island. It goes to detail on how ridiculous the war and the people in the war is and shows us a good deal of sides and views on the matters. However this makes the book extremely repetitive and slow paced. Same stories are told again and again, through so many characters I stopped being able to keep track of them. I didn't need 38 chapters to finally like one.

The way Joseph Heller writes isn't to my liking in the slightest. The explanations of events are verbose, jumping from place to place and character to character. You start a chapter from a plane in the middle of a war and end it in a fully unrelated story that happened 10 years prior. Finally I gave up on trying to understand everything and just plowed through to reach the end.

Lastly the role of women in the book was just... Not? Every single female character is somehow connected to sex. Either they're a sex worker, a nurse that gets sexually assaulted or somehow sex is written into their description. Maybe there is a point to this and it belongs to the satire but I did not catch that.

Content Warnings

mahamsiddiqui's review against another edition

Go to review page

dark emotional reflective sad tense slow-paced

Plot- or character-driven? Character
Strong character development? It's complicated
Loveable characters? Yes
Diverse cast of characters? No
Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes

3.5

When the book first came out in 1961, the notion that war is bad might have been something new to the reader and awakening too. But, in this day and age, when there are so many opinions and lived examples available, we all know and can say with assurance that war is bad, except for fascists and dictators. So, as for the concept of 'Catch-22', it's not novel anymore.

I felt like the novel dragged in places, it also felt like I'm reading someone's diary instead of a novel, sometimes felt like a college student looked up the synonyms in a thesaurus and put every word that they could find in the book.

The book certainly is witty and funny. The characters are well written. Their humanness and fallibility and their complexities make you think or forces you to think, human beings are not black and white. War is evil. Human beings are mere pawns in it, and at the mercy of the fascists, who invoke wars to stroke their tiny egos. Through Yosarrian you see how a person in trying to do the right thing is always caught in exasperating circumstances. The skepticism of Yosarrian is something that I guess all of us go through after a certain point in life. It's relatable and quite understanding.

Moving on, I absolutely did not like and was quite frankly disgusted by the rape and sexual assault scenes. They were described jn graphic details, and I believe for which there was no need. The treatment of women as mere sex toys was very disturbing. And we know that, that's how men treat women especially those who go to war. Women and children and elderly suffer the most. Women and children are raped, brutally assaulted and all because the men who go to war think that it is their right for defending their country to gain sexual pleasures by hook or crook. I just wish that the sexual scenes were described to a minimum.

All in all, book is good, okay. 3.5 stars, .5 extra for Yosarrian. I loved him till the end. You cannot predict that the characters will have this human aspect to them when you first start the book but as you go by and the book explore similar scenes from different POVs you understand them and mildly condemn yourself for judging them too hastily.

Content Warnings

c3liaiswhoiam's review against another edition

Go to review page

slow-paced

Plot- or character-driven? Character
Strong character development? No
Loveable characters? No
Diverse cast of characters? No
Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes

1.5

This was shit. It doesn't hit my good spot at all. I'm a very character-driven person, you know? If the plot is bad, I can sometimes get by if the characters are still good, but these characters are so many, and they're all unlikeable, they're all the same, they do the same shit, and they know the same people. I can't read books like this! That's not interesting to me! It's so clearly satire, but it's not funny to me. It's just depressing and frustrating to read. I need hope! This doesn't give it. I need enjoyable characters (not necessarily likeable ones) but this doesn't give it. And finally, it's just such a fucking drag. There was absolutely no reason for this book to be longer than 300 pages. None. Silch. Nu-uh. It's too long, and it's hard to keep tabs on which character you're with, and it's entirely character-driven but without character development (because it's satire...), and I really wish I hadn't needed to waste my precious time reading a book that wasn't suited to my tastes whatsoever, when I'm busy enough as it is right now. Because all this book did was frustrate me. It was just. so. frustrating. Never again do I want to think about this book.

Content Warnings

seanml's review against another edition

Go to review page

challenging dark funny slow-paced

Plot- or character-driven? Character
Strong character development? No
Loveable characters? No
Diverse cast of characters? No
Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes

3.25

Reading anything called a ‘classic’ is a gamble; you don’t have to go too far back for them to be super problematic. In this instance, Joseph Heller’s Catch-22 ended up being a mixed bag. It’s a comedy novel that takes place during World War II, and was written in the 1960s. It is very much a product of its time. The book is “clever,” but clever in the way that a high school freshman would ask you “Is water wet?” and then once you answer they’re prepared to argue the complete opposite point in order to confuse you. In Catch-22 the military is basically run by the Marx Brothers: misunderstandings are frequent, and nothing is safe from being a gag to the point of death. Each chapter is in a way a skit focusing on a soldier or a commander, one of the handful that the book revolves around. They range from entertaining to infuriating. Luckily our protagonist is a soldier named Yossarian who happens to be the only sensical character throughout the entire thing. So as I went crazy from the never-ending chapters, Yossarian was right there with me. Unfortunately, I couldn’t relate to him in the chapter when he sexually assaults a nurse out of the blue. Yeah, this is the 1960s and every female character has at least one line about the shape of their breasts. This does not in any way pass the Bechdel test. In any case, the book does a good job at portraying the mania-fueled spiral of someone told to die for the good of their country again and again and again. Did I misunderstand most of it? Maybe. Should I read it again? Maybe, it depends on if it was good. Was it good? I’d have to read it again. Catch-22. 6.5/10.

Content Warnings

elmewhy's review

Go to review page

adventurous challenging dark funny informative fast-paced

Plot- or character-driven? Character
Strong character development? No
Loveable characters? No
Diverse cast of characters? No
Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes

2.5

~~2.5 Stars~~ 11th September 2022
*rounded to 3 stars

I think it’s fair to say that this review is a modern Gen Z take on a classic that was not written for me or for people of my time. This book was just not for me. While I appreciate that this book was written at a different time, I couldn’t forgive some parts of it. I decided to split my review into a pro and con list.

Pro
It’s a classic for a reason. The origins and concept of the term ‘Catch 22’ is genius. After researching this book, I can see why it was so popular, especially with young people during the Vietnam War.
War Representation. I did appreciate the insanity of war portrayal and the desperateness this led to. I’ve not seen a lot of portrayals of this in classic or modern media, and it was an interesting take to see.
Format. Polarising, but I enjoyed the format. It is disjointed with sporadic short stories mentioned, which are revealed later in the book, the re-read ability is huge, and you can reread parts with a brand new understanding. There are many characters, but this format taught me whos who much more quickly. Although not comparable, I did get a Grand Budapest Hotel vibe from the format/humour/visualisation.

Con
Misogyny. There’s a lot of this; in fact, I don’t believe a female character is mentioned in a way that wasn’t sexual or perverse or made them out to be less than deranged. Here are some examples:
One character is named “Nately’s Whore”, who is a prop prostitute for a character until they get mentioned more and becomes a psycho stalker killer. Lots of inappropriate touching, mostly sexual assault and the women don’t always seem to care?! Mentions of underage women (as young as 12) and virgins are sexualised - although we never see this, it is idolised heavy. **Trigger!** A very heartless and glossed-over mention of a rape where the female dies from it and gets thrown out of a window, with no consequence even though the police turn up, but they chose to focus on other topics rather than the raped and murdered women lying in the street.
Racism. N-word usage - only really in the beginning. Again, something which is more prominent in older books as it was the norm during this time but does not hold up in the modern day.
Humour. I just did not get the humour, there were parts in which I thought ohh I get why people think it's funny, but I definitely wouldn’t call this hilarious. The humour was repetitive (the same word play humour beat to death), the context was just not funny, and, for me, the misogynistic, classism and racist overtones overshadowed the book for it to be funny.
If you’re a fan of adult-level pantomime jokes, you’ll be fine.

Ultimately, while you get to say you’ve read this notorious classical book and boast to all your friends that you’re smart and read more than YA/fantasy/preferred genre, you actually have to put yourself through it - so how’s that for a Catch 22?

Content Warnings