Well, I am really not sure what techniques the author used to engage the audience because if he did use any, they were entirely lost on me. As for making the story effective, I had not realized that there was a story. Did I happen to mention that I really hate this book with all the passion of my soul, and that I had to stop myself from tearing it in half several times while reading it? Unfortunately, that last part was not an exaggeration.
If there was any attempt to interest the audience at all, them it must have been in trying to create an interesting character, which was an utter failure in my opinion. The author tried to make Holden a seemingly shallow person, and a really deep person on the inside. While he succeeded in making him deep, he also made him someone I just could not stand. Does anyone really like reading about a person who thinks so lowly of themselves that they feel bad for receiving presents (Salinger 52)? It is just depressing in a huge sort of way. What kind of person writes this kind of book?
As for my other point, there was absolutely no story to be made effective. Holden does not get into any serious trouble, does not meet and fall in love with a beautiful girl, and does not make any huge realizations about his nature. The entire book was Holden telling stories and trying to occupy his time. That is almost like a story about an average trip to the supermarket, only with less excitement. There was absolutely no plot at all, and I can not understand why this book is popular. I would really appreciate it if someone explained it to me. I really would. This book fills me with questions about things I do not and never will understand, so I guess trying to explain it would be pretty pointless. Disregard that last request, because if there is anything I hate, it is something without a point.
Salinger, J. D. The Catcher in the Rye. Boston: Little, Brown and, 1991. Print.