Why Not Catch-21?: The Stories Behind the Titles

by Gary Dexter

Each of its 50 chapters focuses on the origins of one of the great titles of world literature, presenting a bite-sized piece of literary history, with fascinating details of the work's genesis and composition. The emphasis is on titles that are literally inexplicable without this background knowledge. The origins of 50 great titles in world literature – fascinating bite-size pieces of literary history.

Genres: Nonfiction, Books About Books, Reference, History, Writing, Essays, Literary Criticism

238 pages, Hardcover

First published October 15, 2007

Reviews

[Sesana · Rating 3 out of 5]

It seems that the essays here were originally published as installments in Dexter's column about books. It shows, mostly in just how short and to the point the essays are. This is the sort of book that can be read in tiny chunks, or read all at once, as I did. The best essays for me were, of course, the ones where I already had some interest in the work, but most of them were pretty interesting, some of them much more so than I'd expected. Granted, there's nothing in the essays that would be surprising to somebody who makes a habit of studying the works in question. But how many of us have studied the process behind all fifty of the books here? I certainly haven't. It definitely looked to me that Dexter had done his research. There are plenty of sources at the back, and I didn't catch any errors in the things I was familiar with. A fun read for those interested in the writing process.

[Pink · Rating 2 out of 5]

2 stars was kind of generous, but there were a couple of interesting facts that I liked. This wasn't what it stated, but instead was a random collection of quite boring facts about mostly unheard of books. I'd still like to read the titled book.

[Tineke · Rating 3 out of 5]

I've finished this book just now, because I've tagged someone with it.
I started to like the book more and more. Interesting bits and pieces which made me grab my phone every now and then to look someone or something up.
I've already read Catch-22 twice, but I think I might have to again.
Also brought another dimension to the Netflix-show 'Lost in Space' which is a robinsonade, as I've learned. It might give me the push to start this show too.
And what a coincidence! I tagged Bookworm-lady with this book and she is the one who registered this book. Bookworm-lady, one of your books is coming back home for a while!

[Tamara · Rating 3 out of 5]

I was mostly interested in Catch-22 and Who's Afraid of Virginia Woolf, as I have read/watched both of them and still didn't quite understand how the title was chosen. Catcher in the Rye is another one of those question marks for me, but there wasn't an essay on it in this book.

Interestingly, Catch-22 was almost named Catch-18 and Who's Afraid of Virginia Woolf originated from some graffiti on a bar mirror.

I now understand a bit more about how the titles play into the themes of these books, but will promptly forget my new-found knowledge, as is my way.

Favorite Quotes:

Orr is crazy, and can be grounded, but if he asks to be grounded he is sane - and he can only be grounded if he asks.

Albee said that its meaning was 'who's afraid of the big, bad wolf, which means who's afraid of living life without delusions?'

[Jukka]

Why Not Catch-21? - Gary Dexter
I picked this up between books with only small interest in the essay of the title, but ended up inhaling the whole thing over the course of a day in some abstruse random order.
A collection of 50 short essays with curious details on either the origin of titles, or more often some unusual circumstance and biography behind various works of literature. A jumbled encyclopedia of historical literary oddities that will appeal to those fascinated with literary curios -- AKA book-nerds.
It has stuff like: Moby-Dick, Hamlet, Cinderella, Faust, 'the' Robinsons, Frankenstein, Freud, Gatsby, Winnie-the-Pooh, Sherlock Holmes, Dorian Gray, Miss Lonelyhearts, Orwell and Godot.

[Fred Forbes · Rating 4 out of 5]

Easy to get through, mainly because I blew by the literary areas that hold little interest for me such as poetry and plays but the explanations of the titles for the books I am familiar with were fun. Semi-spoiler - the title that Heller wanted for his book was "Catch 18". Guess what novel came out at the same time that caused the publisher to want to change the name? Evidently Heller was tough to convince. A delightful literary romp.

[Clare · Rating 3 out of 5]

If you enjoy learning the process of an author’s writing and what inspires the author, this is a great book for you. I do enjoy such subjects and so this book was right up my alley, but I found the writing to be so dry and academic that I ended up focusing on the sections that were about books that I had read and skimming the sections that were about books that I wish to read someday. I skipped sections about books in which I had no interest. I have no regrets about skipping sections.

[Jill · Rating 1 out of 5]

Dry as sandpaper in Arizona - and I should, know, being from the old west myself. The author tries so hard to sound smart that he comes off sounding more like he enjoyes his own scholarliness, rather than delivering on what seemed to be and easily entertaining premise. By the time I got to the part about why Catch 22 was so named, I didn't even want to know anymore.

[Nick Black · Rating 3 out of 5]

largely forgettable, beyond that which you've known all your life. a decent enough gift for bookish people. i read this sometime last summer during cigarette breaks iirc, but have no real clear recollection of having done so, so keep that in mind regarding my authority here.

[Sarra Tebib · Rating 2 out of 5]

Eh, i wish it were more developped and fun

[Tony Lawrence]

(retrospective review c.2010)

A fascinating find from a street sale that we stumbled on in Ipswich (what a great idea btw). The stories behind the titles, '... a small number of book titles have a rather odd, separate existence, almost as independent literary artefacts.'

Dexter deconstructs 50 famous and not-so-famous book titles with a very thorough, if not pedantic, eye for detail, sometimes tracing the history of book themes (e.g. ‘Cinderalla’ of the genus poor-cleaning-girl-finds-her-prince-with-the-help-of-glass-slippers – I kid you not!) Despite each little potted history being only 3 or 4 pages long some are a bit dull, an ancient text or obscure works, and the lack of modern books made the whole thing a bit less interesting. That said, there are some real nuggets in here, like, ‘pooh’ the swan, the precursor to Lolita (the worst of a number possible/probable plagiarisms), the metaphorical title ‘The Postman Always Rings Twice’ and the lack of postmen or any ringing at all in, and finally, Heller originally preferred Catch-18 as a completely arbitrary number, but it was already ‘taken’ by Mila-18

[Nicholas Zacharewicz · Rating 4 out of 5]

An excellent collection of trivia about various milestone works in European and North American lit. Funny if you've already got a background with some of the works covered (thinking about the bit about muses in the chapter on "The Tenth Muse Lately Sprung Up in America" still puts a smile on my face), and informative if you're a curious reader looking to learn more. I definitely recommend it in either case.

[Michael · Rating 4 out of 5]

Some parts were boring, as I wasn't familiar with the books discussed. But then, at the end, I took real pleasure in learning what I did not know. After all, we read to learn, no? Dexter writes well and displays considerable knowledge for literature. I expected him to be a professor, but alas he appears to be only a journalist.

[Davidg · Rating 3 out of 5]

I picked this up for next to nothing in a charity shop. The book is made up of a series of articles and it shows. It is quite interesting but each chapter is very short giving only a brief outline that could have been expanded as it was made into book form. I am not sure how much I will be able to remember in a week’s time.

[Justin Ritter · Rating 3 out of 5]

Stories about the stories behind many great works through the ages. I would read two or three each night before bed.

[Michael · Rating 5 out of 5]

Good fun and educational too!

[اکمل · Rating 5 out of 5]

I enjoyed reading this book. That's great. Thank you Mr. Dexter.

[Jeffrey Greening · Rating 5 out of 5]

Interesting book … my fave essays were on Cinderella, Catch-22 and Around the World in 80 Days. Disclaimer: I did not read the essays on novels I hadn’t read.

[Dan Smith · Rating 1 out of 5]

I can't remember who recommended this book to me. It must have been the author or a friend of his, because it's a fairly shallow dive into a seemingly random array of books, many of which I've never heard of, let alone read.

And the dive isn't particularly illuminating. I don't know what I was expecting when the way in was the choice of title and alternative never-weres, but it seems like the author wasn't either, as we get occasional recitations of the plot or true history behind a work, some ruminations on what was going on in the work's author's life, and some of the titles which lost out or a fairly obvious etymological dissection of the actual title.

It's written a little better than I'm making out, but it's scattergun and slapdash, and doesn't have much insight.

The most interesting thing by far is the testy exchange between Arthur Guittermann and Arthur Conan Doyle, in which Guittermann penned "The Case Of The Inferior Sleuth", a scorching critique in a fantastic sonnet accusing Doyle of denigrating Poe's seminal detective Dupin and of downplaying his influence on the character of Holmes. Doyle riposte was equally scorching, and also in sonnet form, explaining patiently that it is Holmes who denigrates Dupin, as a character flaw, and that it is obvious that Doyle venerates him and acknowledges the influence, you dickwad. He didn't use exactly that language, but it's pretty clear it was probably in the first draft.

There, I've told you the best bit: no need to read this one. A far book for this type of thing is Alastair Grey's The Book Of Prefaces, which were i reading it now would get all the stars avaialble.

[Ian Laird · Rating 4 out of 5]

Gary Dexter is a very good literary detective.

Example: Herman Melville’s Moby Dick is based on a real whale called Mocha Dick, an albino sperm whale frequently sighted near the island of Mocha off the Chilean coast, a battle scarred veteran who dealt with whalers with ferocity and cunning, until eventually harpooned and killed.

TS Eliot’s The Wasteland was originally entitled He do the police in different voices, possibly not the catchiest of titles, until Ezra Pound suggested the shorter, now well-known one, and put in some major hatchet work on the text.

Gary Dexter has produced lots of these fascinating accounts, which added substantially to my appreciation of the works, familiar and unfamiliar. There are explanations like the definitive examples above, others are more speculative, like his account of the manifold origins of Cinderella, or become commentary, witness his take on The Swiss Family Robinson, a cherished book read innocently in my childhood, now traduced as I learn it is really a litany of animal slaughter and piety as the family attempt to establish a Calvinist paradise on their remote tropical island.

My favourite entry though is The Sun also Rises, Hemingway’s sardonic joke reflecting upon the grievous wound he himself had received in World War One.

[Kate · Rating 3 out of 5]

"But that mimosa grove--the haze of stars, the tingle, the flame, the honeydew, and the ache remained with me, and that little girl with her seaside limbs and ardent tongue haunted me ever since--until at last, twenty-four years later, I broke her spell by incarnating her in another."

"One of the many themes running through the play is the desire of two old tramps continually to relieve themselves. Such a dramatization of lavatory necessities is offensive and against all sense of British decency."

"He saw a man who appeared to be on the verge of death stagger into a movie theater that was showing a picture called 'Blonde Beauty.' He saw a ragged woman with an enormous goiter pick a love story magazine out of a garbage can and seem very excited by her find."

"The deep-folded, penetrable rock of the living woman! The woman, hiding her face. Himself bending over, powerful and new like dawn. He crouched to her, and he felt the blaze of his manhood and his power rise up in his loins, magnificent.

'I am risen!'"

[Birgit · Rating 4 out of 5]

Who's never wondered about how certain books got their title? Being an avid reader myself, I certainly wonder about that every now and again. A lot of titles are pretty much self-explainatory, while others seem, well, strange and certainly ask for some further explaination.
Initially written for the "Title Deed" column of the Sunday Telegraph, Gary Dexter presents 50 books - all presented as brief and succinctly written nibbles - and how they got their titles. From "The Republic“ und "The Tragic History of Doctor Faustus“, to "Hamlet“ und "Moby Dick“, straight to "The Postman Always Rings Twice“ and "A Clockwork Orange“ every book-lover might learn a thing or two about those novels which only few people know.
In short: This might not be a book for everyone, but let it be said that "a book about books" doesn't necessarily mean it's going to be boring. In fact, it's a fresh, entertaining and intelligent read.

[SmarterLilac · Rating 4 out of 5]

Thoroughly absorbing. I love process stories, so it was fun to find out how the titles for these famous works were picked by their creators. Among the surprises: Catch-22 was almost named Catch-18, and at one point Joseph Heller and an editor were literally sitting around an office trying to think up numerical combinations that 'worked' better than 18; 1984 was once called 1982--also, no one actually knows why Orwell chose that title, the 'year reversal theory' (which holds that 1984 was a satire of 1948) is just a theory; Sonnets from the Portugese was based on a private joke between the Brownings; F. Scott Fitzgerald had many different titles in play for The Great Gatsby, a choice he wound up hating.

[Mark · Rating 5 out of 5]

Thoroughly enjoyed this book. Great to get some background on some of these titles. Some of the books mentioned I hadn't read - makes wonder what have I been reading?

Oh wait, I can just look on goodreads...

10/21/08:
[I thought] this book had some wonderful anecdotes, and although humorous, it does not always give the story of the title, but relies heavily on the story behind the work. And at times only offers a possible reason for the title, leaving the reader to decide. But that does not take away from Dexter's writing or the work of art itself.

If doing a paper on any of the books or plays listed, this could be used a reference.

[Paul Westwood · Rating 4 out of 5]

This is a very interesting book if you're interested in knowing how writers have come up with the names of their novels and books. There were a fair few titles that I'd never heard of and they obviously held less interest for me than ones I'd read like A Clockwork Orange and Catch 22. All the same, it was very helpful to see all the different ways in which the final title was decided and noting that providence often played a part in forcing the title on or presenting the title to the author when they'd had something else in mind. Every writer has different sources and different reasons for choosing names of things and it was very helpful to my writing to understand that.

[Benedict Reid]

This has been the book I read when I'm between books, or don't have time to read a whole chapter of another book. It's an interesting set of facts related to book titles, and it reads like a set of newspaper columns from the arts pages... which of course is exactly what it is. Despite the often pompous and condescending style, I did find it a fun read. The author particularly enjoys "catching out" writers for referencing their influences... given that these writers have often explicitly put these references in their work's titles, it's hardly "catching them out".

[Jillian · Rating 3 out of 5]

Based on the title and the subtly brilliant cover, I expected all of the essays to focus on interesting title choices and changes, but many were more general creation stories with little of interest on the title itself. And interestingly the "Catch-21" of the title was never an option discussed for Catch-22, though 11 and 14 were. Those quibbles and a few bad jokes aside, many of the essays were quite intriguing and enlightening, and it's definitely a book I'll keep.

[Cheryl · Rating 3 out of 5]

I picked this book up at the convention in Athens because I have always been intrigued by the title. It covered 50 different works, about 1/3 of which I was not familiar with, and provided information on the source of the title and the synopsis of the story line. It was good for a book to read in short sittings here and there and probably would have been enjoyed more if I weren't suffering from jet-lag throughout.

[Angie Fehl · Rating 2 out of 5]

There were some interesting facts I picked up in a few of the essays, but I found most of the collection to be incredibly dry in tone. The title essay about Heller's Catch-22 was cool to learn. I think my favorite essays were the one on The Lady Of The Camellias -- the real life woman who inspired that character -- (how am I ever going to forget the significance of the crimson camellias now, LOL) and Marie Stopes' real life court case that inspired her book, Married Love.

[Kendall Concini · Rating 2 out of 5]

#latereview

Quite boring, not what I was expecting.

Dry narration, with mostly unknown titles- those that I knew had only mildly interesting statements (not even insights- just statements)- let alone the bleg for unfamiliar titles. Maybe stronger conclusions or tidbits could have sparked an interest to read or share- but everything was flat.

I love another reviewer’s description, my overall reaction was, "Yep, sometimes our ideas come from strange places, and that's that."