There are moments that are really really effective and affecting, moments that are probably better than anything in Rye. But I can't follow the serious Salinger fan majority here and agree that this is a better book. It is far less consequential. I mean, this is like that family in the Royal Tennenbaums, they're all so damn smart and mean. But at least that movie is funny. It's hard to like these people, it really is; even if they are rendered quite well. Who really cares about these people? I don't think I do. That being said, it is very, very well written. I admire it but I don't like it particularly, if that makes sense. And I will commit sacrilege and say that Rye is better. It is at least consequential, it is a definitive something. This is well written stuff about some very spoiled people. Yes, there are books about spoiled people that matter, but they have more insight to the human condition than this. I don't know any Frannys, any Zooeys, any Bessies, any Buddys and maybe only one or two Lanes. I have a bit of a hard time believing they could exist, or that anyone would want to know them if they did. I know this sounds awfully harsh for an 8/10 but I still admire the book for its better moments (especially the first part) and its detail. Also, there is a great moment of profundity about: “As you say, treasure's treasure, God damn it, and it seems to me that ninety per cent of all the world-hating saints in history were just as acquisitive and unattractive, basically, as the rust of us are.” Amen.