Catch-22

[Luthien]

Originally posted by: Zenmervolt

Originally posted by: Luthien
I read it a long time ago like 15 years or something. I hardly remember it outside the fact of what a catch 22 is.

Now that I think of it a Catch 22 defines religions too, lol.

Basically anyone sane enough to know they are not fit for combat is sane enough to to be in combat and anyone insane will not know they are not fit for combat so they will never leave combat unless in a body bag.

Close, but no cigar.

"There was only one catch, and that was Catch-22, which specified that a concern for one's safety in the face of dangers that were real and immediate was the process of a rational mind. Orr was crazy and could be grounded. All he had to do was ask; and as soon as he did, he would no longer be crazy and he would have to fly more missions. Orr would be crazy to fly more missions and sane if he didn't, but if he was sane he had to fly them. If he flew them he was crazy and didn't have to, but if he didn't want to, he was sane and had to."

(Yes, that's from memory.)

The book is, quite simply, a masterpiece of logic as used against itself. It's one of the best arguments against an over-adherence to a system of logic and beautifully illustrates the sheer absurdity that can result from too closely following a logical system as applied to inherently non-logical humanity. Also, some the darker humor and philosophical musings are wonderful.

"Man was matter, that was Snowden's secret. Drop him out the window and he'll fall. Set fire to him and he'll burn. Bury him and he'll rot like other kinds of garbage. The spirit gone, man is garbage. That was Snowden's secret. Ripeness was all." (I did have to look this one up to get the order right.)

ZV

bleh no different than what I said; the result is the same.

 

[judasmachine]

Yup, that's some catch...

I think Heller meant it to be tough to read, but then I loved it.

 

[Luthien]

Chuck yeager in his autobiography quotes that catch 22 rule verbatim from catch 22.

 

[Zenmervolt]

Originally posted by: Luthien

Originally posted by: Zenmervolt

Originally posted by: Luthien
I read it a long time ago like 15 years or something. I hardly remember it outside the fact of what a catch 22 is.

Now that I think of it a Catch 22 defines religions too, lol.

Basically anyone sane enough to know they are not fit for combat is sane enough to to be in combat and anyone insane will not know they are not fit for combat so they will never leave combat unless in a body bag.

Close, but no cigar.

"There was only one catch, and that was Catch-22, which specified that a concern for one's safety in the face of dangers that were real and immediate was the process of a rational mind. Orr was crazy and could be grounded. All he had to do was ask; and as soon as he did, he would no longer be crazy and he would have to fly more missions. Orr would be crazy to fly more missions and sane if he didn't, but if he was sane he had to fly them. If he flew them he was crazy and didn't have to, but if he didn't want to, he was sane and had to."

(Yes, that's from memory.)

The book is, quite simply, a masterpiece of logic as used against itself. It's one of the best arguments against an over-adherence to a system of logic and beautifully illustrates the sheer absurdity that can result from too closely following a logical system as applied to inherently non-logical humanity. Also, some the darker humor and philosophical musings are wonderful.

"Man was matter, that was Snowden's secret. Drop him out the window and he'll fall. Set fire to him and he'll burn. Bury him and he'll rot like other kinds of garbage. The spirit gone, man is garbage. That was Snowden's secret. Ripeness was all." (I did have to look this one up to get the order right.)

ZV

bleh no different than what I said; the result is the same.

There's no mention of the inevitability of death in combat in the origial quote. That's purely your own editorial insertion in your paraphrase. The original also says nothing about "fitness" for combat, only a desire to participate in it. The distinctions are subtle, but important.

I'm also not sure how it could possibly be applied to religions, but that's neither here nor there.

ZV

 

[Dirigible]

I loved that book. (A feather in my cap. 🙂 )

I've struggled with some other "classic"-type books. I gotta admit that when I've struggled and finished 'em I almost always regretted it. If I struggle I usually don't get anything out of it except wasted time (a black eye 🙁 ) and a few inadvertent naps. Now I just stop reading and move on, no matter how great the book is supposed to be.

 

[greatfool66]

I tried to get into this book and could not. I read maybe 50 pages.

The sarcastic/satirical tone of the author just sounds way too much like some smart teenage kid showing off who criticizes everything around him because he realizes that the world isn't always logical.

I don't disagree with the books premise, which probably has something to do with the irrationality of war/political systems in general though, just the smartass presentation.

I also couldn't appreciate The Slaughterhouse Five like some people. The formula of black humor is supposed to be: (take some horrible event like firebombing) -> present it in some novel/humorous way= the reader sees the absurdity/ tragedy in a new way. My problem is I just read it like a regular joke that isn't very funny and the tragic aspect is diminished.

 

[patentman]

Catch-22 is one of my favorite books. You might have to read it a couple times, but it is freakin hilarious.

What's your name? Major Major Major, sir. And you're a major is that right? Yes, sir, Major Major Major Major, reporting for duty sir....

 

[lizardth]

Originally posted by: NuclearNed
Unlike what someone else posted, I'm going to tell you to not EVER watch the movie. While it may have a few merits, it is complete nonhumorous bastardization of the book.

Yes, a complete narrative emerges. When you get to basically the final chapter, everything makes a whole lot of sense.

Absolutely right on all points. :thumbsup:

 

[KoolAidKid]

I read that book a long time ago. One of the few that I read in one (long) day. I liked it, obviously.