As soon as I started reading Esmé, I immediately connected it to A Perfect Day for Bananafish. I think that both short stories have glaring similarities as well as some less obvious ones.
First of all, there's the obvious connection between the wars. Both Seymour and "Staff Sergeant X" have been emotionally and mentally changed by their experiences in the war. They are both extremely mentally unstable, yet people treat them like they are perfectly fine. I can't decide whether or not treating them like nothing's wrong is good for them or not. Muriel and Corporal Z act like nothing's wrong even though they know that something really is. Muriel keeps defending Seymour and dodging her mother's questions about him. She says during their conversation: "'Mother, you talk about him as though he were a raving maniac-'" (9). Muriel's mother is terrified that something is terribly wrong with Seymour, but Muriel acts as though nothing is wrong. Corporal Z continues to have a normal conversation with Sergeant X, even though there are glaringly obvious signs that this is not a normal conversation. The first clue is when Corporal Z enters the room and Sergeant X says to him: "to be careful not to step on the dog"(107). There is no dog on the floor except the one in the sergeant's head. However, Corporal Z continues as though nothing is wrong. Why do Muriel and the Corporal treat them like this?
I also think that both Seymour and the Staff Sergeant connect oddly well with children. Although Sybil is much more of a child than Esmé is, there is still that connection with the soldier and the child. I think that this goes back to the ongoing Salinger theme of innocence. Seymour and Sergeant X connect so well to children because the children remind them of their earlier days when they were innocent. However, Seymour connects with Sybil after he has been unhinged by the war. Sergeant X connects with Esmé before he's been changed by his experiences in the war.
I think the point you brought up about people treating Seymour and Sergeant X as if nothing is wrong is really key. It's less of a "right or wrong" reaction than a self-defense one in both Muriel and Corporal Z's case. I think they both prefer to ignore the sometimes blatant signs of mental instability from less of a spiteful attitude and more of an attempt to protect themselves. They find they have enough to deal with without the addition of another person's insanity.
ReplyDeleteI also made the connection between Bananafish and Esme that Lydia made as I started to read the second part of Esme. During the 38 days in which Sergeant X had been at war, it is very obvious that something had changed who he was. This could have been a single event or the war experience as a whole that changed him. The instability of his character immediately reminded me of Seymour in the fact that both of them have been scarred by the war and can be considered "insane".
ReplyDeleteIn response to Lydia's question, I think that these characters are treated like this because if they accuse them of being crazy, then they might blow up, emotionally, and could seriously hurt someone or themselves. Although Muriel treats Seymour like he is normal, his experience ended up being too much anyways and he killed himself.
I agree with Lina and Lydia. I think it's odd that both Muriel and Corporal Z would ignore the signs of insanity in both Seymour and Sergeant X. However, I think that Corporal Z handled the situation better than Muriel. He at least attempted to connect with Sergeant X. I think he probably thought that by speaking to X normally and inviting him out, he was going to somehow help to make him feel better. I think you also see this during the pot shot/cat conversation. Z comments, "..you know the reason I took the pot shot at it, Loretta says? She says I was temporarily insane." I think in Z's own way, he is trying to somehow connect to X and tell him he can relate. However, like in "Bananafish," the only person that X can really connect with is a young girl. Although we don't know what happens after X receives Esme's letter, I think it's fair to say he seems to be on the road to recovery. Which, is in great contrast with what Seymour ended up doing. Although both Seymour and X both found some relief in the innocence of the children, their paths ended up differing greatly afterwards.
ReplyDeleteI agree with both Lydia and Jen that there are many connections between the mental state and stability of both Seymour and Sergeant X. I also then agree that this connection back to innocence and their abilities to connect with children as a reminder of their past innocence that has eroded away due to the war. Seymour was able to connect oddly well with Sybil and, similarly, Sergeant is able to connect and communicate with Charles during the tearoom encounter. However, considering how all these books are tied together in some mysterious way, I thought to myself that there could be a possible connection between the Sergeant and Franklin from "Just Before the War With the Eskimos" because Franklin has no drive nor will to move out of house or make something of his life, Likewise, (unless i misunderstood the passage), even after the war, Sergeant is still somewhat "stuck in place" and does not really wish to leave his room and isolates himself from others, similarly to Franklin, but this was kinda just a shot in the dark. If anyone is able to find any subtle connections to other stories feel free to comment on this.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDelete