There was a recent wrecker post that did this a lot. It comes across as reactionary to me but sometimes I see leftists doing it too. Nerd culture being associated with being childish/nostalgic and easily exploited by sanitised consumption, etc.
As an autistic person who sometimes gets hyperfixations that could be seen as childish, it feels gross to have people paint these hobbies as some kind of uniquely hyperconsumerist thing, because 90% of the time it’s just because the hobby is seen as childish and/or neurodivergent coded.
For example: I was hyperfixated on gardening for a while. It was expensive, really hard to do ethically and the industry itself is massively corporate and responsible for some of the biggest environmental problems today. It’s a nice little escapist hobby where you can turn your mind off while you pretend you aren’t fucking up your local biome because Monsanto decided it would sell more soil wetter, plant disease cures and fertilizer ifs product kills the soils ability to self regulate. I tried to do it the organic permaculture way, ended up being too expensive and half of the products were not in fact as ethical as they pretended to be. Also I have a degree in Ecology, most gardners don’t have that luxury and are not trained how to garden ethically. Never once have I ever seen anyone call gardening a vapid corporate hobby or expressed concern that I was using my fake little biome to escape from the real world. Never once have I been lumped in with the same people who invented DDT. Because it’s a socially acceptable hobby for a well adjusted adult to have.
I can’t say the same for when I had a Pokemon hyperfixation. It was a relatively cheap hobby, I mostly just played the games and the rom hacks were fun. But I stopped because who wants to be associated with grown ass adults waiting in line for cards and playing a childrens game! They must be mentally ill in some way, right? Now adults who still like a hobby they grew up with get put into the same camp as Harry Potter fans, who we have apparently now have decided are bad because Harry Potter is childish and whimsical, not because the writer is a racist transphobe.
Just something that mulls over in my head sometimes, because social dynamics that make no sense to me are another thing I like to fixate on and dissect for fun. I tend to see how the flow of popular narratives can manipulate people into adopting reactionary talking points. All you have to do is trojan something onto a socially acceptable target without outright saying the target and you have even leftists redirected to attack a target that the right want dead. People are funny.
Thanks for reading my weird rant. I could just be coming across as insecure and making myself an easy target for wreckers to get a rant from, but eh who cares if I get a reputation as someone easily baited by this subject. Someones gotta deconstruct this kind of thing so it might as well be me.

Spoilers for The Catcher In The Rye; CWs child sexual abuse, suicide
I got a very different reading from The Catcher in the Rye. I read it as a communist in my 20s (it’s not exactly on school curricula where I live), and I absolutely did see myself in Holden, but it’s more nuanced than that. I understood Holden as a traumatized kid — a repeat CSA victim, he saw an extremely violent suicide firsthand, his brother died of leukemia — who is now sabotaging his own happiness through toxic masculinity. He’s a bit like the worst parts of Shinji and Asuka put together in that regard, if you’re familiar with Evangelion. The “toxic masculinity” part wasn’t what I related to, but more the disillusionment with society, and his tendency to get fixated on, depressed at, or make fun of things that he sees as representing what’s wrong with the world, that sort of thing. But just because I can see that part of myself in his character doesn’t mean that it’s a good part: this is something people need to understand about relatability, that it doesn’t have to be all positive traits.
“Growing up” is like an invasion of the mind: Holden’s behavior is like the part of him that’s been so thoroughly done unto, clamoring to get out; but that insurrection of his progressive side keeps getting put down by his reactionary side, i.e. the internalized ideas being pushed onto him as a part of the traumatic process that is “growing up” and being molded into an ideal subject under capitalism. And so, Holden’s legitimate grievances about the world get twisted, and he puts on this masculine front instead of actually addressing the problems he faces head-on. And that’s what TCITR is: Holden’s mask, and throughout the work it slips a few places here and there to give you an idea of what’s under the mask, and what’s under the mask is really just a kid who needs a good friend’s lap to cry into.
It’s kind of ironic, actually, that you’re saying these things about the adults and peers in your life while also saying that you don’t relate to Holden. To me, what you’re saying is more evocative of how Holden talks about his roommates and teachers at Pencey Prep than anything else. Kind of the point with Holden is that he is himself no less of a phony than the people he talks about, but calling a bunch of people in your life “Holdens” instead of “phonies” doesn’t mean that you aren’t doing that same “everyone’s a phony but me” error.
I dunno, I hope you don’t mind me saying that. I don’t know you, and a handful of social media comments isn’t really enough to accurately assess a person’s character.
Honestly you have a way better understanding of the book then me.
I have to wonder if TCITR might be the sort of work that resonates best with people in their early to mid 20s, the age when I read it. The context in which a lot of people first read TCITR is as early-teenagers being forced to read it for school, and at that age you’re maybe not reading it super critically[1], and since you’re being forced to read TCITR by an authority to get a good test score, you’re maybe from the outset sort of incentivized to have a negative outlook on it, the same as most anything becomes a chore if you’re being forced to do it (see also: wage labor). So the result is that teenagers read TCITR and they see Holden acting out and being a dick for no apparent reason, but then the parts where the mask slips and we see how unreliable he is as a narrator, those parts kinda go over younger readers’ heads.
On the other hand, I know people who read TCITR for the first time in their 30s or older, and the fact that they were that much older than the protagonist really colored their perception of the work as well. Because by that point you can’t really relate to Holden as a disenchanted young person, you’re more looking at him as if you were his parent or older sibling, the sort of age where you can understand the stage he’s at in life, but you’re just so personally far past that stage of life that you really just want to “shake some sense into him”.
Edit: Sorry for all the hedge words lol
Obviously that’s what the schools are trying to get you to do, I just mean that it’s usually not a skill that people have really mastered by that age. Much of the blame for that is in how critical reading is taught in schools to begin with. ↩︎
I enjoyed it personally. Honestly I should reread it tbh.