Catcher In The Rye was written in 1951 and for that time period the content of the book was extremely ahead of its time. Its frequent foul language and sexual themes have caused it to be banned by several school systems across the country since its release. Some people may wonder why Salinger makes Holden Caulfiend curse so much. Some may view Caulfield's persistent offensive language as unnecessary and inappropriate for a young person of Holden's age. As an example, on page 129, when Caulfield compares his and Sally's skating skills to those of the rest of the people at the Radio City skating rink. He said, “...we were the worst skaters in the whole damn rink. " He further recounts that Sally's ankles buckled under her weight on the ice skates, saying, "They not only looked stupid as hell, but they probably hurt like hell too. » These three instances of offensive language were all in the same paragraph. Which would obviously lead some parents to question the necessity of this overflow of profanity. If I had to explain why Salinger gave Caulfield a sailor's mouth, it would be because most young adults use so many profanities. Granted, this doesn't add much, in terms of meaning, to the sentence, nor does it make it any more interesting, other than making the reader laugh every now and then. In this regard, I can understand both why Salinger created his character this way, but I can also understand why people would be offended by Holden's language. Another option might be to partially censor the book. Release a "PG version" that would omit the use of "GD" but leave in the use of milder offensive words like "Hell" or "damn". That way, if people choose not to read the book because of the chore, the offence... middle of paper ... he begins to think about what would be considered "mature" topics in the life. Therefore, they might be a little less offended by Holden's frequent insults. I think Catcher In The Rye should be partially banned. By that I mean that its content has very mature themes that children under the age of 12 probably shouldn't be exposed to in public schools. Now, if their parents want to let them read it themselves, that's none of the school's business or anyone else's business. Primary schools should not have the book on them, as there will always be a chance that a child will get their hands on the book and take it home, causing their parents to see what they have read, which will upset parents because of what the school allows them. child to read.Works CitedSalinger, JDThe Catcher in the Rye. Boston: Little, Brown, 1951. 63. Print.