Catch-22

"Catch-22" remains one of my favorite novels of all time. Its cleverness, wit and insight never cease to amaze me. Having read Heller's novel countless times, I can honestly say that I find something new and surprising about it each time I pick it up. With that being said, I did notice some objection to it both from fellow reviewers and friends to whom I have suggested it. My only theory behind the stark contrast between people who love the book and people who do not understand it is that the rhythm of Heller's writing takes a little while to seep in. Behind the joke is a level of seriousness and behind the seriousness is another layer of satire. It is this layer that is often hard to access, but once one does the entire novel plays out as a macabre caricature of life. I can only suggest that the reader plod along for a long as possible, put it down for a while, pick it up again from the beginning but always keep going. The truth of "Catch-22" is worth discovering.

Why is this a so-called "classic"? Got me. I have no idea. Another reviewer said that you could skip chapters and not miss anything. I agree. I first attempted this novel a few years ago. I quit in less than 50 pages, so bored was I. I picked it up again recently, and I'm now less than 50 pages from finishing. What an unfulfilling reading experience this is. There is no central unifying theme or plot - other than that war is hell and the military rarely makes sense. But we knew that, right? As for the whole catch-22 business, sure, that is amusing the first twenty times, but it gets old quickly. This story could have been told in 50 pages and even that would have been too much.

Why then, if it is so bad, am I about to finish it? You know how it is. You start reading, and you become determined to complete it, just to say you did. There is no enjoyment in it though. I am looking forward to getting done so that I can read something else. My advice? Don't read this novel. Read the ingredients on food packages in your cupboard instead. You'll have more fun.

This is the original (at least in terms of modern relevance) satire of modern warfare and decision making. However, it achieves a level of humour very rarely achieved elsewhere. It is a very personal book, and some of the personal touch, sidesplitting jokes, and very dark serious undercurrent make this resonate more with me than some of the other great "political / moral" satires - Animal Farm and 1984 after all can leave you feeling somewhat cold.

This book is so good, my weak attempt at a review is not going to do it justice. But I'll try.

I knew before I was half-way through that this is going to be a favorite and I plan to re-read it immediately. The writing is so fresh, the character studies so sharp, and the satire so relevant in today's increasingly bureaucratic (corporate) society, no wonder it was so hard for me to find a used copy. It's definitely a book I plan to hold onto and enjoy re-reading every year.

Anyone who's ever worked for a big corporation (like myself) can identify with Heller's hilarious and angry take on bureaucracy. Gen. Peckem's quote reads like a line from Dilbert or Office Space:

"Just pass the work I assign you along to somebody else and trust to luck. We call that delegation of responsibility. Somewhere down near the lowest level of this coordinated organization I run are people who do get the work done when it reaches them, and everything manages to run along smoothly without too much effort on my part."

It's sad how true that is in real life.

But this book is not all satire. It has a big heart. I often found myself laughing and crying at the same time. I can tell Heller cares deeply for his characters, even when he makes high comedy out of their sad fates (such as what happens to poor Doc Daneeka). He's brutally honest about the horrors of war, and laces them with enough humanity to really break your heart. It all makes the climatic "miracle" that much more satisfying. It's a satire that ends with a message of hope. And I like that.

Many people call this book ant-war, but I don't think it is. It really comes down to the last conversation btw. Yossarian and Danby. The ideals of war can be good - who can argue against rescuing Western Europe from Nazi domination. But it's the method of war - and all the evils that go with it - that makes no sense. Are these evils worth the ideals? It's a catch-22. And it's a dilemma that applies to life in general, not just to war.

Although [...]. It had an incredible affect on me. It is incredibly funny, yet very sad in parts. Especially for example when you do finally find out what happened to the gunner, Snowden, in the mission to Avignon. Or when Yossarian walks through Rome.

The ideas concerning the ridiculuous nature of war are as topical now as they were in the 1960s. Actually, of course, Joseph Heller's presentation of the insanity around him predated the Vietnam War, and I wasn't around at that time to truly judge the feeling then.

The dialogue is laugh-out-loud funny at times, as is the juxtapostion of events, as for example when Clevinger complains of confusing cause-and-effect in staring at the bomb-line on the map south of Bologna, willing the line to move itself and for the squadron to not have to fly the mission. In fact, the whole chapter in which this incident occurs, "Bologna" was the funniest in the book for me, with the rain beating down and the mission continually cancelled, Chief Whitehalfoat stealing a jeep to drive home, and Yossarian telling his pilot to turn around. And then, of course, Bologna was a milk-run; no glue gun there.

Anyone who has not read this book and is mystified by what is going on at the moment and since 2003 should read this book. It's not going to change the world, but it is food for thought.

Also highly recommended are the next two of Joseph Heller's novels, "Something Happened" and "Good as Gold."