JD Salinger published "A Perfect Day for Bananafish" in 1948, just after he came back from fighting in WWII. In Vonnegut's Slaughterhouse-Five, Billy Pilgrim admits himself into a mental hospital for WWII veterans in 1948, right after he proposes to Valencia.
In your blog post, please consider connections between these two works of literature. Start with a specific observation and then connect your passage to themes in both works, such as: innocence, PTSD, role of the media, depiction of female characters, glorification of war, hyper-masculinity and war, etc.
You can:
- Choose a specific line and ask a genuine question about it. Try to answer your own question and pose it to the class to consider.
- Choose a specific passage and state what you believe to be its significance.
- Ask a question about something that Salinger DOES in his writing, such as: Why do you think Salinger begins his story, a story whose protagonist is Seymour Glass, with a description of Seymour's wife, Muriel? Try to answer your own question.
Remember:
- Respond to someone else's post. Deepen the thinking, add a new idea, disagree, add textual evidence, make a new connection, etc.
- Your comment should be 5-7 sentences long-- - Use textual evidence as much as possible.
Have a happy holiday!
“The bananafish...Well, I hate to tell you, Sybil. They die...they get banana fever. It’s a terrible disease."
ReplyDeleteWhat does the bananafish and banana fever represent and how does it connect to Billy in Slaughterhouse Five?
In A Perfect Day for Bananafish by J.D. Salinger, the bananafish represent veterans of war and banana fever is a symbol for PTSD. In the story, Seymour is a veteran who is socially awkward and seen as crazy after returning from the war, just like Billy Pilgrim in Slaughterhouse Five. He is a veteran who has been extremely traumatized by war, and he cannot function in this post-war society. This is similar to Billy and how he cannot function, using the “Magic Fingers” to go to sleep. Seymour creates and believes in the bananafish as an outlet for his PTSD. This mirrors how Billy creates Tralfamadore as a coping mechanism his horrifying war experience. Furthermore. The banana fish show how many veterans are negatively affected by war and they need to be treated instead of ignored. This is shown when Seymour is released early from the “Army hospital”, even though he still struggles from war. This mirrors how the doctors in Slaughterhouse Five declared Billy “crazy” instead of realizing his PTSD. Additionally, this passage says “they die” because they get banana fever. This represents how veterans like Seymour and Billy do not have the will to live because they have been so traumatized. In fact, in the United States, “22 Veterans commit suicide every day” (MSRC). As shown, PTSD is a major problem and Salinger uses the bananafish to represent these war-struck veterans.
Evan!
DeleteI came to the very same conclusion. I recognizes the same significance in the bananafish story and I think you worded it beautifully and very concise.I really rook an interest to the beginning of the story when Seymour talks about how the bananafish eat bananas.
When he says that "They're very ordinary-looking fish when they swim in", I believe he was talking about how ordinary people are turned into ruthless soldiers and how the war changes people. The more "bananas that you eat" is really the more people that you kill, making you "behave like pigs", or like a savage. This speaks to the larger idea that war stripes soldiers of their humanity and corrupts them, turning them into killing machines that "eat as many as seventy-eight bananas" (this specific number he gives leads me to believe that it was a personal experience where someone, or himself, might of killed 78 people). Again, I am reminded of soldiers like Lazzaro and Weary who fit this analogy.
Great analysis! Reading your theory expanded my thoughts on A Perfect Day for Bananafish. While I was reading, I didn't fully understand the meaning of the bananafish and why they were significant to Seymour. After, I realized that Seymour believes in the bananafish just like Billy believes in Tralfamador. It's their way to escape their PTSD and their postwar problems and stress. Their beliefs add innocence to their stories and war in their mind. Seymour turned his war experience into a belief of bananafish, while Billy turned his experiences into his Tralfamador theory where no one is dead and people who died in war didn't actually die.
Delete“’Goodbye,’ said Sybil, and ran without regret in the direction of the hotel. “(9)
ReplyDelete“The car doors opened and the woman got out without looking back.” (9)
Why is it important that they both left without regret and how does that connect to Billy’s experience seeking mental help?
A Perfect Bay for Bananafish, by J.D. Salinger, is about a war veteran, named Seymour, who
was released early from the “Army hospital” after having done something that showed his PTSD from the war. This traumatized veteran scared away two women who go never thinking of him again, showing how in the glorification of war many struggling veterans are left behind and not given proper mental treatment. An example is Sybil, who of course did not realize the extent of Seymour’s mental problems, but did leave him on the beach without regret. To her he was a playmate who no longer wanted to play so no longer mattered. Being three, she will not remember him later on at all, he will have been an irrelevant antidote in her life even though they seemed to have known each other for at least a few days. Later he scared a women off of the elevator, but he was unimportant to her, just some creep who will leave no permanent mark in her life. The same thing is seen with Billy Pilgrim, nobody even realized there was a problem until he checked himself into a mental institution. Even still, he did not get the help that he needed and required “Magic Fingers” to go to sleep. Seymour was released after having a mental outbreak and his obvious issues ignored by his wife and irrelevant or insignificant to the people around him.
Fortune Ndombo
ReplyDelete“Do you like Sharon Lipschutz?” Sybil asked.
“Yes. Yes, I do,” said the young man. “What I like particularly about her is that she never does anything mean to little dogs in the lobby of the hotel. That little toy bull that belongs to the lady from Canada, for instance. You probably won’t believe this, but some little girls like to poke that little dog with balloon sticks. Sharon doesn’t. She’s never mean or unkind. That’s why I like her so much.”
This passage mirrors the motif of the innocence of animals in SH5.
In Slaughterhouse Five, Kurt Vonnegut emphasized the nonsensical brutality of humans by revealing how innocent and deserving of life animals are in comparison to us. This comparison was portrayed when Lazzaro gave a detailed description of how he tutored a dog and when the poor condition of the horses, after the bombing of Dresden, was described. Similar to how Billy Pilgrim cried after seeing these horses, Seymour Glass also expresses his dislike for animal cruelty. This could just mean that Mr. Glass simply doesn’t like harm inflicted on animals, however, perhaps, like Vonnegut, J. D. Salinger is trying to portray the same messages about how animals can be better than humans, in that they do not cause destruction and war.
Unlike Billy, Mr. Glass voices his opinions with clear underlying meanings, but why say it to a child?
I believe Seymour Glass takes comfort in Sybil Carpenter’s youth. Because she is young, she will not judge him harshly, and she does not criticize his “tattoos” (which I believe are actually scars or injuries from the war). She is innocent. However, because Sybil is very young, it would not be effective to display his emotions toward war to her. This then continues the cycle of ignorance that the general public, such as his wife Muriel, has on soldiers and the effects of what they had to endure. It’s understandable that Mr. Glass doesn’t want to corrupt her, keeping her in the dark is keeping her innocent, but she will just grow up ignorant like everyone else. In the end, I believe speaking to Sybil is part of his coping method and is something that brings him happiness. This also connects to Billy’s gravitation towards youth, portrayed when he sees a 15 year old blond boy and said he looked beautiful and innocent.
Fortune, I also agree with your point on Pilgrim finding solace in the genuineness and kindness of the animals he encountered before and after the tragic war. Throughout the novel, humans are portrayed as self-serving, inconsiderate, and greedy beings that are only interested in something as long as it benefits them. Even throughout his entire time in the war, Billy Pilgrim didn't cry despite the gruesome deaths he spectated on. The only time he was brought to tears was when he saw how poorly the animals were treated, thus showing this intense admiration and respect for them. To relate this all to Seymour, I think he loves playing with children for similar reasons as Billy- they are untainted ad it is a way for them to see innocent aspects of the cruel world they live in.
DeleteYou make a really good point here Fortune! Seymour takes comfort in Sybil because she has the ability to look beyond Seymour’s involvement in the war and see him as a human being. I think Salinger is commenting on the portrayal of veterans and how that plays into Seymour committing suicide. A good example of this is while in the elevator with the woman, Seymour got frustrated with her because she was looking at his feet. He says, “I have two normal feet and I can't see the slightest God-damned reason why anybody should stare at them”(9). I think that really emphasises how Seymour felt that the woman was treating him differently or treating him like he was unimportant and useless, which highlights the emotional battle veterans deal with trying to adjust to society and normal life post war and the out of place and isolated mentality veterans are left in.
DeleteFortune I love you point with Sybil and how Vonnegut thinks animals are kinder and I relate this to how I believe he was implying Sybil likes to poke this dog. It is almost speaking to the human nature and how people can be naturally violent. The dog has never done anything bad or negative to Sybil yet she pokes it with balloon sticks. I believe that Seymour takes comfort in Sybil's innocences yet at the same time wants to make sure she knows that violence and animal cruelty is bad also showing his disapproval of the violence that occurs in war.
ReplyDelete"'I like to chew candles,' she said finally. 'Who doesn't?' said the young man, getting his feet wet."
ReplyDeleteSeymour is always saying anything that will make Sybil happy, no matter how ridiculous it sounds. What does his connection to kids and Billy's conversation with the little boy in Kurt Vonnegut's Slaughterhouse Five show about the effect of war on veterans emotionally?
In "A Perfect Day for Bananafish", Seymour has a great connection with children. He's so kind and caring towards Sybil and doesn't say anything to upset her. Usually, adults ignore kids and don't want them around. Seymour on the other hand, is keeping Sybil company and engages in conversation. This reminds me of Billy in Slaughterhouse Five, when he tells the little boy who's father was dead that his father is still practically alive and there's no such thing as someone being dead. He says this to cheer up the boy and to make him feel better, just like Seymour tells Sybil about the bananafish, to make her feel better and not worry about anything. I think this draws a connection between the two war veterans because it seems they are both suffering from PTSD,and they're both dealing with it in similar ways. They may seem cruel to some people, but they both have strong and emotional connections to children and care deeply for them. This shows a lot about the effect of war on veterans because it created an emotional bond to children with both Billy and Seymour.
Excellent analysis! I also wrote about Seymour and Billy and how they connect to children in SlaughterHouse-Five and "A Perfect Day for Bananafish". Both of these characters seem to lack innocence from the war, so adding to what you said, I think that their connection to children relates to the innocence for which they wish that they had. In my own analysis, I discussed the passage on page 6 when Seymour talks to Sybil about bathing suits. It seems as though he wants the innocence that a young girl, Sybil, has. Ultimately, Seymour is unable to obtain the same amount of innocence that Sybil has because he is an adult who served in the tragic war.
DeleteI agree with you both! Sybil gave Seymour something his wife could not-innocence. We do not see him with his wife or interacting with her, but Salinger spends pages on Sybil and how she makes Seymour happy. Also the fact that Seymour kills himself next to his wife shows that she was apart of the problem. Sybil was able to make Seymour happy after his trauma, while his wife could not. The lack of innocence Seymour had could only be filled by Sybil, not Muriel, which is probably one of the main reasons he did take his life.m
DeleteAdding on to all of you, I find it particularly interesting that his wife is part of the problem because that is also the case for Billy in SH5. It's interesting to see that after war, veterans suffer over and over again, living a life without innocence and purity. This could explain why Billy had such an infatuation with animals and Jesus Christ. He longed for innocence, as did Seymour. As Seymour describes Sharon Lipschutz, he mentions that what he likes about her is her kind nature. She is only 3 and yet, she stands out by remaining innocent and keeping from hurting the dogs in the lobby. I think it's significant that this small detail seems to have lodged itself in his memory, because it proves that innocence is important to veterans who have seen nothing but terror and death. Though Billy and Seymour can't completely obtain innocence from babies or children or animals, they still yearn for it because it is strongest in these things.
Delete“‘That’s a fine bathing suit you have on. If there’s one thing I like, it’s a blue bathing suit.’
ReplyDeleteSybil stared at him, then looked down at her protruding stomach. ‘This is a yellow,’ she said. ‘This is a yellow’” (6).
What do Seymour’s childlike conversations with Sybil show about the innocence of soldiers after war? How can this relate to Billy’s innocence in SlaughterHouse-Five?
In “A Perfect Day for Bananafish” by J.D. Salinger, Seymour is a recovering war veteran who takes part in conversations with a young girl named Sybil. While at the beach, he compliments her bathing suit, and Sybil soon corrects him for calling it blue instead of yellow. By talking to a young child consistently and in such depth, Seymour seems quite childlike. I think that his conversations with Sybil show the need for innocence when it is taken away by war. When soldiers experience such tragic events during war, their childhood innocence can be completely diminished. When Sybil corrects Seymour during their conversation, it demonstrates how Seymour does not have the innocence that Sybil has, no matter how hard he tries to keep childlike conversations with her. Additionally, her “protruding stomach” (6) portrays innocence, while “his shoulders were white and narrow” (7) shows the opposite of that. Furthermore, Seymour’s lack of innocence is similar to Billy’s. During the war, Billy imagines soldiers as children in several points of the novel, which correlates with the diminishment of innocence that soldiers face during war. As demonstrated in Seymour’s character, these negative effects of war can stick with soldiers for the rest of their lives.
Great analysis! I too, was intrigued by Seymour's affinity for children. I interpreted this scene in a slightly different light; Seymour's misperception of Sybil’s bathing suit as blue instead of its bright, exuberant yellow speaks to his state of sorrow. Even a light as beautiful and electric as yellow, symbolic of Sybil, cannot temper the extremity of his sadness and mental instability. Perhaps this is why he spends so much time near the ocean, and perhaps why he fantasizes about a self-invented species christened “bananafish”. Like these fish, he is overcome with the blue depression and gloominess that surrounds his environment, and he cannot reach the surface of this ever-extensive ocean of sorrow to relish the radiance of the yellow sun. He subsequently fills this void with meaningless things, or "bananas", too which he finds himself so entangled that he cannot escape the "hole" that he originally buried into.
Deleteto*
Delete"'What happens to who?'"
ReplyDelete"The bananafish"
"Oh, you mean after they eat so many bananas they can't get out of the banana hole? ... They die'". (8)
How is this scene conveying the insensitive treatment war veterans receive (Seymour and Pilgrim) in the ignorant societies they live in in which they are outsiders?
This particular scene is very significant because it relates the two war veterans because after they both endured the catastrophes of war, they had no one truly concerned about their mental states, thus leaving them to find different outlets for all they keep bottled up. In Slaughterhouse Five, after getting front row seats to all of war's tragedies, Billy returned to a careless society that romanticized war and failed to acknowledge his PTSD. The lack of humanity and empathy present in human beings were embodied by the animals in the novel, in whom Pilgrim found great solace and consolation in. Seymour, himself, has PTSD and during their vacation, he prefers playing with the children at the resort instead of Muriel and the other adults This inclination towards playing with the kids can be interpreted as his desperate attempt to cling to what little innocence is left in the inconsiderate society he is a member of. Seymour, an outsider in the materialistic world in which Muriel is a self-serving socialite, is disregarded the majority of the trip by his wife who also deems his erratic behavior 'normal', suggesting that she does not really take his mental health seriously. At the end, the bananafish that cannot get help are left to suffer and die, which directly correlates to Pilgrim's state of depression after being silenced and neglected and, Seymour, unable to cope with it all tragically terminates his life.
I strongly agree with this analysis and think you did a great job! The similarities between Seymour and Billy Pilgrim are profound and representative of a society in which correct treatment and understanding of ptsd and its symptoms are not fully understood. Seymour's playing with little kids instead of being with his wife could also relate to Billy and Tralframadore, for these both act as escapes from the horrors of war which are obviously haunting them. The tragedy of death connects the two as well, Billy seeing almost everyone around him die, and Seymour, a man so ill that he decides to end his own life. Both can somewhat be looked at as a symptom of ptsd.
DeleteGreat ideas! I agree with the part in which you argued that Billy truly had no one that cared for him, however, I don't think it is the same for Seymour. Seymour had his wife backing him which is portrayed when she chooses to stay with him rather than leave him and go to another country as was suggested to her from her parents. Sure, he may not have gotten the proper mental care which is shown when he was released from the army, but he still did have someone who cared about him and his mental illnesses.
Delete"He glanced at the girl lying asleep on one of the twin beds. Then he went over to one of the pieces of luggage, opened it, and from under a pile of shorts and undershirts he took out an Ortgies calibre 7.65 automatic. He released the magazine, looked at it, then reinserted it. He cocked the piece. Then he went over and sat down on the unoccupied twin bed, looked at the girl, aimed the pistol, and fired a bullet through his right temple." (9).
ReplyDeleteHow does the significance of the shortness of Seymour's actual suicide, reflect Vonnegut's main point he was trying to make about war?
J.D Salinger only spent one paragraph discussing the actual moment of Seymour's death. The other 9 pages, were a lead up to this moment, and then the actual scene, was not graphic, intense, or drawn out. This reminds me of the part in the beginning of Slaughterhouse Five, where Vonnegut wants to make Derby die after the bombing because of stealing a tea pot-but he ultimately decided against it. This is because he did not want to make one person the hero, another solider dying in war, he did not want to spend time focusing on the deaths, he wanted to show the trauma from the war. This is what Salinger did with Seymour. There is clear PTSD throughout the short story, as is true with any war vet, which Salinger does, similarly to Vonnegut to show the aftereffects of war. He spends only one paragraph focusing on the suicide, because that is not the important part. He wants readers to look into the why, and how of the situation to actually take away something other than pitty. Vonnegut does the same thing by making Billy the protagonist and showing the aftermath of war, and only briefly mentions how he dies. The similarities in both show how war stories should be told and how both authors wanted readers to look past the war and how these events affects soldiers in real life.
I definitely agree with your interpretation and that is also something I have not thought about very deeply. Although, I would like to add to the “why” and “how” of the situation that Vonnegut wants his readers to think about. Vonnegut wants to build a connection between the reader, characters, and war by projecting the debilitating mental after effects of war and, in a way, minimizing death by saying “So it goes” after someone or something dies. This gets the reader to think about how dehumanizing nature of war by not putting any importance behind someone's life, no matter how young or old.
DeleteI completely agree! Salinger's strategy of making Seymour's death short and straight to the point forces readers to ask questions and fully analyze every part of the 9 pages of "lead-up", instead of relying on religion to tell them about afterlife. This connects to SH5 because of Billy's obsession with the truth about religion. Religion is often used to comfort people when it comes to death because people think that it can answer questions like why, how, and what now. However, at the same time, religion stops individuals from actually looking at the events that lead up to the death. Also, both Salinger and Vonnegut satirically describe death in an insensitive way to open the audience's eyes to the everyday struggles that veterans with PTSD have to deal with.
ReplyDeleteThis is a great point! I agree with your point completely, but I also think that they focused more on everything else and less on the actual death for many reasons. One being that they wanted us to focus on the impact of war on humans and how it changes how we think and react to things.
Delete““Well. In the first place, he said it was a perfect crime the Army released him from the hospital--my word of honor. He definitely told your father there’s a chance--a very great chance, he said--that Seymour may completely lose control of himself. My word of honor.”
ReplyDelete“There’s a psychiatrist here at the hotel,” said the girl.” (4)
The issue and prevalence of post traumatic stress disorder, especially in soldiers coming out of the war is an important theme within A Perfect Day For Bananafish as well as Slaughterhouse Five. During this period of time, in the 1940’s the issue of ptsd was not fully understood and treatment was severely lacking. The example of “Seymour may completely lose control of himself” (4) illustrates the medical society’s shortage of knowledge surrounding this highly important issue, especially in a time where ptsd was rampant among war vets. The quote “There’s a psychiatrist here at the hotel” (4) exemplifies how the common person has little to no idea pertaining to the treatment and symptoms suffered by people affected by ptsd. Seymours losing control of himself connects to Billy Pilgrim, a character who also obviously suffers from ptsd. Billy acts crazy and delusional in the eyes of those surrounding him which further represents humanities shallow understanding of post war trauma. These two stories relate to each other and comment of the pressing issue of ptsd, and how society’s lack of understanding can be detrimental to those afflicted with this illness.
“"If you want to look at my feet, say so," said the young man. "But don't be a God-
ReplyDeletedamned sneak about it."
"Let me out here, please," the woman said quickly to the girl operating the car.
The car doors opened and the woman got out without looking back.
"I have two normal feet and I can't see the slightest God-damned reason why anybody
should stare at them," said the young man. "Five, please." He took his room key out of his robe pocket.”(9)
What does Seymour’s anger reflect about him or war veterans in general?
The possible reason behind Seymour’s anger towards the woman “looking at his feet” is because he is frustrated over being regarded as an outcast after the war and not being understood by the people around him on the experiences he dealt with at war. This can be connected to how Billy “coped” with his war experiences by believing in Tralfamadore and the Tralfamadorian philosophy. Seymour and Billy both had different ways of coping or simply living with the events in war. Seymour’s anger reflects his want to feel normal although his condition is being disregarded by his wife and he is not trusted by his in-laws. Essentially, his mental health condition is misunderstood and in some cases brushed off which leads to him proceeding to commit suicide soon after the elevator incident. I presume this is common amongst war veterans, struggling with their mental health.
Really great analysis, but I also thought of Seymour's feet as representing the idea of self-coinsciousness. You can compare this idea to yours by connecting how the people around him make him feel about himself. This innocent woman might have just been looking at the ground, but Seymour automatically comes to the conclusion that she HAD to be making fun of the appearance of his feet. Unlike Billy, Seymour does not seem to have any way to cope with the events of war and any PTSD, which is why his anger is conveyed onto strangers, and is why he ultimately kills himself.
Delete“‘See more glass,’ said Sybil Carpenter, who was staying at the hotel with her mother. ‘Did you see more glass? Pussycat, stop saying that. It’s driving Mommy absolutely crazy. Hold still, please’” (6).
ReplyDeleteHow does the absence of understanding and communication between the characters in A Perfect Day for Bananafish reinforce Vonnegut’s argument of the lack of communication between veterans dealing with trauma and people post war?
In A Perfect Day for Bananafish, Sybil and Seymour struggle with expressing themselves to their peers, because they’re seen as childish or crazy. While with her mother, Sybil began to yell Seymour Glass, but her mother mistook it for, “See more glass”, and brushed Sybil aside. Similarly, Seymour struggles with communication issues when Muriel is convinced that Seymour has overcome his trauma, when in reality he has not. Coincidently, the only time Seymour interacts with someone in the story is with Sybil, someone who is also often misunderstood and overlooked. Not only is Salinger commenting of the ability of children to be compassionate and understanding, but he is also arguing that the lack of communication between the adults in the novel supplements to the eventual downfall of Seymour. Furthermore, this correlates to Slaughterhouse Five because similar to Seymour and Sybil, Billy Pilgrim is also often overlooked by his peers and labeled as crazy and useless because of his experiences in war and his inability to interact with the world after the war. Vonnegut, like Salinger, places emphasis on the little effort made into trying to help veterans dealing with trauma adjust to the world post war.
I completely agree with what you're saying Cynthia, but when I first read it, I thought of something different. I thought that, like Kurt Vonnegut in Slaughterhouse Five, Salinger was commenting on the motif of vision and perspective. When Sybil says "See more glass," I thought that was Salinger's way of saying that Sybil, although she is a child, is the only person who sees Seymour for what he really is and sees that the war that he took part in had a great affect on him. This idea connects to yours in the way that Seymour and sybil have a deeper connection then the author leads on.
DeleteI thought this was a really unique interpretation of the theme of communication- It seems as if soldiers & people who are subject to such stress and trauma during war don't get the recognition they need. People they are surrounded seem to float on the surface of their problems, rather than truly making an effort to understand them, and I think this emphasizes their instability.
Delete"'Here comes a wave,' Sybil said nervously. 'We'll ignore it. We'll snub it...two snobs'" (8).
ReplyDeleteWithin Slaughterhouse-Five, the protagonist repeatedly conceals most of his emotions. He seems emotionless but as the reader turns the pages, it is clear that he years for death and he argues that he no longer cares for his own life. In this quote from "A Perfect Day For A Bananafish," there is a lack of emotion. Seymour tells Sybil to simply ignore the wave and that reminded of how Billy regularly ignores his feelings and ends up crying on his bed, in confusion. It also seemed similar to the Tralfamadorians and how they had knowledge on how the world would end bu they were just going to ignore it. I found this significant because it shows how after war, veterans are exposed to the outside world but tend to lose a piece of themselves. It makes them seem empty or confused and can bring them to the point of hopelessness and suicide. In SH5, Billy experiences his death over and over again, telling the guards to just leave him be because it is his time to die. As if, in that moment, he is just "snubbing it" or "ignoring it." This gives the audience an insight into a veteran's mind. After serving their time in war, they feel as if they have no other purpose or they feel as if no one could even begin to understand what they've gone through. This could explain why they shut themselves out from the world and keep to themselves.
This comment has been removed by the author.
DeleteI really like your analysis of the veterans mind. Many times we fail to acknowledge that they suffer from their own issues that often go unsolved. It is also interesting that after truly looking into what they say you can see the dark and cryptic message of it which makes you question why haven't others picked up on this and done something, by claiming the role of a bystander it works to promote the mental distress until it becomes to late. Which is probably one of the reasons why veterans with PTSD tend to ignore the issue because others around them seem to be ignoring it too. In Slaughter House Five we see this in the phrase "so it goes" and we see it here in the quote mentioned.
Delete"He very definitely told your father there's a chance -- a very great chance, he said -- that Seymour may completely lose control of himself. My word of honor" (4).
ReplyDeleteSeymour's post-war experience is similar to Billy Pilgrim's in many ways, how do their experiences post-war connect, and why is the reaction above important?
After I read this quote from the short story, I automatically connected it to Billy Pilgrim and the entirety of Slaughterhouse Five. Compared to Slaughterhouse five, where no-one really knows about Billy's PTSD, in A Perfect Day For Bananafish, I noticed that the majority of the characters know about Seymour's PTSD and try to help him by advising that he sees a psychiatrist. This shows that they are obviously worried for his mental health, but I don't think that they see the bigger picture. Like in Slaughterhouse Five, they don't put themselves in the position to understand exactly what war veterans go through and how their experiences have a long term affect. This also connects to a quote later in the short story:
"did you tell him what he tried to do to Granny's chair?
No, Mother. I didn't go into the details much" (5)
The reason I think this connects to the prior quote is because the other quote showed a beginning of someone taking action and trying to help, but the quote above shows that there isn't much care on the wives part. Its clear that she understands the circumstances, but another thing that is clear is that she chooses not to care and not to believe what he mother was telling her. She doesn't grasp the fact that if she does nothing, then there will be consequences.
“‘Did he try any of that funny business with the trees?’ ‘I said he drove very nicely, Mother. Now, please. I asked him to stay close to the white line, and all, and he knew what I meant, and he did. He was even trying not to look at the trees- you could tell’... ‘Well, we’ll see. How did he behave-- in the car and all?’ ‘All right,’ said the girl” (3).
ReplyDeleteHow does Muriel and her mother’s patronizing talk of Seymour relate to the mistreatment of veterans in Vonnegut’s Slaughterhouse-Five?
The manner in which Muriel’s mother speaks of Seymour is ravaged by doubt and condemnation, all of which is targeted towards Seymour’s PTSD. For example, Muriel’s mother asks Muriel if Seymour tried “any of that funny business with the trees”, which is a distinct allusion to Seymour’s trauma following his participation in war. The severity of Seymour’s illness is lightened through Muriel’s mother’s use of the phrase “funny business” to characterize traumatic tendencies; unlike mere “funny business”, post traumatic stress disorder cannot be so easily quelled, yet Muriel’s mother exhibits reluctance in believing this to be true. Furthermore, Muriel responds to her mother’s question with a reassuring, “he drove very nicely”, followed by appraisal of Seymour’s abilities to “stay close to the white line”. Muriel’s elation with Seymour is all rooted in marginal competency; she exults in pride that Seymour can obey minor orders, which works to belittle Seymour and minimize him to his mental illness. Like a dog, Seymour must be commanded and subsequently rewarded, as this is the only way in which Muriel and her mother believe Seymour can function. This illuminates the lack of true understanding that Muriel and her mother possess of Seymour, let alone mental illness, which coincides with the lack of understanding of veterans in Slaughterhouse-Five. The complexity of Billy’s mental instability is consistently blanketed with ambiguous terminology liken to “crazy” and “far away”, and hence Billy is forced to make do with ineffective treatment such as “magic fingers” and “naps”. This dehumanization of veterans is further exemplified by Muriel’s mother posing the question as to whether or not Billy “behaved” himself in the car. The word “behave” illustrates the lack of faith that Muriel’s mother has in Seymour’s ability, as she is evidently uncertain of his mere self-composure. “Behave” is commonly used in animal talk, especially for animals who are particularly rowdy. Seymour is too easily mistaken for this beast-like, malicious, and blood-hungry animal, demonstrating the lack of objective understanding of war veterans and their trauma issues; perhaps this is why Billy found solace in animals, as they too were misunderstood.
Also, Muriel has mentioned that Seymour is “too pale” twice, to which her mother has responded that he is in desperate need of some sun. Both times Seymour’s paleness has been mentioned has been under the context of his mental health, which sheds light on how minimal Muriel and her mother’s comprehension of the scale and nuance of mental instability truly his; through mentioning the ailment of Seymour’s skin, Muriel works to ground Seymour’s mental entanglement in something physical, as something physical can be easily remedied in her superficial world. Furthermore, rooting Seymour’s metaphysical instability in a physical sickness lessens the extremity of this illness, and thus is an evasive comfort for Muriel and her mother.
DeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
DeleteI like your connection to major themes also present in SH5. Really interesting. Adding on, it's also really interesting the amount of materialism present in the conversation between Muriel and her mother. On page 5, sort of sandwiched between patronizing talk concerning Seymour and his actions, they're talking about clothing in a very casual manner, as if Seymour's mental illness could be considered as concerning or as casual as materialistic things. Furthermore, the conversation about the clothing is more negative: "'How's your blue coat?' 'All right. I had some of the padding taken out.' "How are the clothes this year' 'Terrible. But out of the world. You see sequins--everything.'" This more negative tone towards clothing, when compared to the tone towards Seymour also exposes the lack of concern needed when regarding PTSD.
DeleteNot only is Seymour misinterpreted as a beast as you said, but similarly to boys in "The Mask You Live In", no one is looking for the root cause of their actions, they simply send the boys to detention. In this case, they simply dismiss Seymour's problems by saying he should have been in hospital longer, but they don't look for an answer as to why he has PTSD and how they can help him instead of sending him to a hospital again. Yet clearly they were too late, seeing that he kills himself, and it shows that the root cause is really what has to be investigated and it simply isn't what people are doing with veterans.
Delete
DeleteWhen Muriel states that Seymour “stay close to the white line” it reminded me of when Kurt Vonnegut was making the outline for war and how his outline was numerous colors that represented the lives of the soldiers in the war. The saying, "color inside the lines" seems to play into both Vonnegut's and Salinger's critique of how people see the war as they cannot see outside of what they already know they only look at the war as "lines", borders, politics, which dehumanizes them and blinds them to the horror behind war. This also gives in to Vonnegut's use of optometry and lenses in Slaughterhouse-Five because the "lines" that Muriel refers to is her social lense and how she can't see beyond the borders and politics that the society advertises for war.
-Soledad Aguilar-Colon
What does the reference towards Muriel as 'Girl' and Seymour as 'Young Man' while referring to Sybil by her name show about JD Salinger's ideas about innocence and how does it relate to innocence in Slaughter House 5?
ReplyDeleteDespite knowing her name, Muriel is referred to as "girl" throughout the story, like Seymour being referred to as "Young Man," while Sybil is referred to by her real name. I interpreted this as a commentary on innocence. Because Sybil is very young, she acts upon what she wants to act upon, without worry or care, and therefore she would have her own individual identity. However, both Muriel and Seymour are older, and have experienced more hardships, which may have caused them to lose their innocence. Like Billy Pilgrim and other men that went through WWII, Seymour lost his innocence, and therefore lost his individual identity. And maybe as commentary on materialism after WWII, Muriel lost her identity/innocence through her obsession with appearance and objects. Sybil's innocence may be related to the innocence of animals in Slaughter House 5, where she is seen as pure, and Seymour does anything to make her happy, like Billy Pilgrim's feelings towards animals. Furthermore, Muriel and Seymour are referred to as young (girl, young man), showing how society and war can be enough to dehumanize people. This relates to The Children's Crusade, and forcing babies into war in Slaughter House 5. They may be young, but war and materialism have caused them to lose their identities.
This makes me think of Slaughterhouse Five, when Billy's name is described as friendly and child-like. The innocence of names are used to exploit how babies are the ones who fight wars. I also think that "Young man" could be Seymour's desire to be innocent due to his experience in war. This is similar to Billy and how he wants to be done with the war, but he is constantly revisiting it due to his PTSD. The one thing I don't understand is why is Sybil not called "young" even though she is the most innocent out of them.
Delete"'Mother,' said the girl, 'you talk about him as though he were a raving maniac
ReplyDelete--' 'I said nothing of the kind Muriel.' 'Well, you sound that way. I mean all he does is lie there. He won't take his bathrobe off' 'He won't take his bathrobe off? Why not?' ' I don't know. I guess because he's so pale.'" (5)
How does this passage relate to what we know about PTSD from SH5?
When the mother depicts Seymour as a "raving maniac", she is categorizing him under the stereotypical assumption that people have of soldiers after war, especially the ones that have some sort post traumatic stress disorder. The reason why the mother seems to be so overprotective throughout the conversation over the phone is because she knows that Seymour is not stable, which can ultimately be harmful for her daughter. In stead of figuring out ways to help him, they are speaking in spite of him. Also, the bathrobe that Seymour wears is also significant to the disorder he has. This robe represents a guard that he wears around himself to protect him from the bad that is around him, and he is being judged for doing that by his close family. It's also significant when Seymour takes off the robe when he is with Sybil. He takes off his guard when he is around people that he is comfortable around, but puts in back when he feels insecure or alone, like in the elevator with the woman who stared at his feet.
" 'Thats a fine bathing suit you have on. If there's one thing I like, it's a blue bathing suit.' Sybil stared at him, then looked down at her protruding stomach. ' This is a yellow,' she said. ' This is a yellow.' ' It is? Come a little closer,' Sybil took a step forward. ' You're absolutely right. What a fool I am.'" (6-7).
ReplyDeleteHow does this contrast with Muriel's reaction to Seymour's PTSD and how does it connect to Vonnegut's theme of innocence ?
When Seymour tells Muriel about his tattoos, she does not tell him that he has none.Instead, she goes along with these hallucinations that Seymour has as a veteran suffering with PTSD. In contrast, Sybil tells Seymour that he said the wrong color. In response, he corrects himself instead of having a tantrum that Muriel's mother would probably expect him to have. Age plays a big role in why Seymour and Sybil seem to have a better relationship. Through Vonnegut's eyes Sybil would probably represent Eve because they are both innocent. Both Seymour and Billy were babies that went through war and now desire the innocence they were stripped of. Neither of them can find that in their wives and are therefore distant.Montana is to Billy as Sybil is to Seymour. Since Sybil is young, she does not see Seymour for his PTSD and therefore, has no problem with being honest with him.
I agree with this. We also see this with Seymour and Sharon Lipschutz. Shemour likes her because she is "never mean or unkind" like the other children. Veterans like innocence and kindness because they know the terrible things that comes with losing your innocence and kindness. So being next to innocence is rather safe to them because they don't have to grow up and become mean. Additionally, that's what war does; war forcces them to grow up and become cruel.
Delete" 'Well, I hate to tell you, Sybil. They die.' ... 'Well, they get banana fever. It's a terrible disease.' " (8)
ReplyDeleteI believe that the significance of putting this in the story was the bananafish was representing Seymour. The terrible disease that the fish get and die is representing PTSD and how it makes u do crazy things. And in the end of the story, he ends up killing himself which proves the point of them saying that the terrible disease makes them die. Seymours PTSD takes over, like this terrible disease the fish get.
I completely agree with this! Additionally, you can connect the banana fever/PTSD symbolism to when Billy finds out that humans aren't the ones who end the world in Slaughterhouse 5, as the Banana fever is detrimental to Banana's and unavoidable, just like the end of the universe, it is entirely out of our control. Also, both Vonnegut and Salinger use fantasy/science fiction to talk about the horrors of war.
Delete“ “Do you like Sharon Lipschutz?” Sybil asked. “Yes. Yes I do,” said the young man. “What I like particularly about her is that she never does anything mean to little dogs in the hotel lobby. That little toy bull that belongs to that lady from Canada, for instance. You probably won’t believe this, but some little girls like to poke that little dog with balloon sticks. Sharon doesn’t. She’s never mean or unkind. That’s why I like her so much.”
ReplyDeleteWhat is the contrast between the way Seymour treats children and adults telling us?
Seymour treats children in this story gently and is very kind to them. He seems to take comfort in their presence, and I think it is because he is fond of their innocence. Children are so naive to the faults of the world and haven’t been guilty of inflicting harm unto others, which is like a utopia to seymour. It’s obvious he is resentful to other adults, and this is most likely because of his exposure to violence and tendencies people in war have. This bias kind of reminds me of Billy in Slaughterhouse Five- both characters have a sensitivity to innocence. For example, Seymour’s tenderness to children is similar to Billy’s empathy for the animals that were being mistreated in Dresden. I believe they both act this way because they are scared of these creatures losing this sense of innocence, where ignorance can lead to a repetitive pattern of violence
Well, they swim into a hole where there's lots of bananas. They're very ordinary looking fish when they swim in. But once they get in they behave like pigs." (8)
ReplyDeleteWhat does the change in attitude or personality of the bananafish when in a different enviroment symbolize?
I think that when the Banafish acts normal before it goes in the whole vs. when it enters the hole symbolizes a soldier before and after war. Before the war the soldier acts like any normal citizen, however when they are put through something as horrific as war it messes with their mentality. You see this most clealry through seymour, he was originally a civil person, however after the war he has all these mental problems.
ReplyDelete“There were ninety-seven New York advertising men in the hotel, and, the way they were monopolizing the long-distance lines, the girl in 507 had to wait from noon till almost two-thirty to get her cell through. She used the time, though. She read an article in a women’s pocket-size magazine, called ‘Sex Is Fun-or Hell.’ She washed her comb and brush. She took the spot out of the skirt of her beige suit. She moved the button on her Saks blouse. She tweezed out two freshly surfaced hairs in her mole. When the operator finally rang her room, She was sitting on the window seat and had almost finished putting lacquer on the nails of her left hand.”’ (3)
In a capitalist society, women often times use makeup to cover up the parts of their face that they don’t like about themselves which J.D Salinger uses to represent Muriel’s mask that she puts on so as not to see the pain and suffering that is affecting her husband Seymour. In the passage Muriel washes off her combs, the spot on her skirt, she takes out the hairs on her moles, which symbolizes how her personality is not very genuine in the sense where she’s constantly fixing things about her physical traits. The fact that she has to continuously pull and wash things off of herself right before she calls her mother to talk about Seymour represents how uncomfortable she is with not only herself but with her relationship with her husband, however she uses the make-up and the magazine to cover it up. In Slaughterhouse-Five, when Billy and Valencia are on their honeymoon, Valencia tells Billy that she is incredibly proud of Billy for being a soldier in the war and she says how she wants to look better for him, as if her looks could help Billy with his trauma and grief from the war. In both Slaughterhouse-Five and A Perfect Day For Bananafish, the motif of makeup and physical appearance is used to symbolize how both women are blind to the pain and most likely PTSD that their husbands are suffering.
-Soledad Aguilar-Colon
"She read an article in a women's pocket-size magazine, called "Sex Is Fun-or Hell." She washed her comb and brush. She took the spot out of the skirt of her beige suit. She moved the button on her Saks blouse."
ReplyDeleteBoth Vonnegut and Salinger write about the connection between sex/glamour and war, what are the similarities and differences between their writing styles?
Vonnegut reveals his views on this connection through the character of Valencia, as she asks Billy clueless questions about the war when they are in bed together on their honeymoon. Billy avoids answering the question, clearly regarding it as trivial, a question that any woman would ask mindlessly about the war. Salinger also approaches this issue with a nonchalant attitude, as his war story opens with a woman reading and article about sex, and how it can be like "hell", which connects to war and fire, and then she just completely disregards this and mindlessly fiddles with insignificant trinkets. Both stories show how women often fail to see the significance and horrors of war, thus they often sexualize/glamorize it.
“Tell me, did you talk to this psychiatrist?.... What ‘d he say? Where was Seymour when you talked to him?’”
ReplyDeleteAre there any similarities with Billy daughter,Barbara, and Muriel’s mom and what do these similarities represent?
Muriel’s mom and Barbara, Billy's daughter, demonstrate society, especially, women's mistreatment towards veterans and ptsd. Society treat veterans as children, who are in need of care and can't be left alone. However, by using relevant women in these men’s lives, the authors are demonstrating the soft, emotional, and worried patriarchal view of women. Muriel's mom is constantly worried about Seymour's actions and her daughter, and wants to get him help. This is seen when she asks about the psychiatrist’s thoughts on Seymour. Billy’s daughter constantly worry about Billy and wants to care for him. In SH5, Billy’s son doesn't bother him much about his visions with the tralfamadorians as his daughter does. In “A Perfect Day for Bananafish”, Muriel's dad does not bother Muriel as much as her mom does. Veterans are taken cared off mostly by women because they are soft hearted, well at least, that's what society says.
"Did he get one in the Army?" (6).
ReplyDelete"He took out an Ortgies calibre 7.65 automatic. He released the magazine, looked at it, and then reinserted it. He cocked the piece. Then he went over and sat down on the unoccupied twin bed, looked at the girl, aimed the pistol, and fired a bullet through his right temple" (9).
This passage lets us know that Seymour was a soldier in war, much like Vonnegut and Billy in SH5. Both Seymour and Billy are criticized for their lack of hypermasculibity, Billy being described as skinny and a broken kite, and Seymour pale because he always wears his robe. Billy and Seymour both survive the war, and have to face reality which brings me to why I chose this quote. I think it not only shows that their experiences of war are slowly withering away their sanity, but that the transition back to society after war is a daunting task that I think pushes Seymour to commit suicide. Sallinger and Vonnegut alike are commenting on the treatment of veterans, and the lack of necessary attention and care to the magnitude of the stress born by veterans after their war experiences, causing PTSD. This reminds me of the video Jonathon brought up in his SH5 presentation as well, and how much as little as care and attention goes when it comes to veterans, and how that can mean the difference between life and death.
Your point is very true and interesting. No attention is given to the post-traumatic stress disorder of characters during Slaughterhouse-Five or this short story. The wives of both Billy and Seymour are completely ignorant to this disease. Whenever Valencia ask Billy about the war he replies with a dry, short, and emotionless tone set on by his post-traumatic stress disorder. Likewise, Muriele ignorantly disbelief and denies that anything is wrong with Seymour. Both stories highlight this problem.
Delete“ ‘You haven’t? Where do you live anyway?’ ‘I don’t know,’ said Sybil. ‘Sure you know. You must know. Sharon Lipschutz knows where she lives and she’s only three and a half.’ . . . . ‘Whirly Wood, Connecticut,’ she said, and resumed walking, stomach foremost. ‘Whirly Wood, Connecticut,’ said the young man. ‘Is that anywhere near Whirly Wood, Connecticut, by any chance?’ Sybil Looked at him. ‘That’s where I live,’ she said impatiently. . . . ‘You have no idea how clear that makes everything,’ the young man said.”
ReplyDeleteThis passage highlights and symbolizes the difficulty for communication about post-traumatic stress disorder. It is very interesting that Seymour's only true Communication in this short story is with a child. This reminds me of the baby and child motif present in Vonnegut’s Slaughterhouse-Five. Seymour's desire for clarity In this passage speaks to his difficulty with communication. This short story as a whole a call for help against post-traumatic stress disorder. I also find interesting Seymour's inherent social awkwardness. This reminds me Vonnegut's message against dehumanization in Slaughterhouse-Five. A recurring theme in Slaughterhouse-Five was Billy's inability to communicate after the war. No one believed him when he talked about Tralfamadore, making him seem very socially awkward. Muriel was also blind to Seymour's post-traumatic stress disorder, making it clear that even someone close like a wife does not understand this disease plaguing her husband.
“If you want to look at my feet, say so,” said the young man. “But don’t be a God-damned sneak about it.”
ReplyDeleteSeymours irrational and angry outburst towards the woman he wrongly believed to be looking at his feet is telling of his mental stability. Seymours anger doesn't spark from the women staring at his feet but rather contributes to his inner struggle with creating true human connections in which he feels comfortable and trusting of the people that are around him. Though it may seem that he is already receiving love and care from people such as his wife who is much like valencia in Slaughterhouse Five she and others fail to see how needy he is for authentic and non materialistic based connections. His unfounded anger towards the woman to always be at arms and weary around others. To further connect this point in the short story to slaughterhouse five one must look at the point in which Billy Pilgrim admits himself to the hospital “Billy had committed himself in the middle of his final year at the Ilium School of Optometry. Nobody else suspected that he was going crazy. Everybody else thought he looked fine and he was acting fine. Now he was in the hospital.” both experience similar issues. Both men find themselves struggling mentally which the people round them don't truly see or if they do dismiss them as crazy or dangerous, Billy who suffers from PTSD was never suspected of being sick until he had to admit himself and even then he was seen as crazy not as one who suffers from ptsd and Seymour who commits suicide directly after his outburst is seen even to the reader as shocking. His wife sybil and in particular her mom seem to be more worried for how seymour may hurt sybil rather than himself and ironically this promotes his instability becoming a cycle for seymour.
I agree with your understanding of the outburst. He is forced to contain himself and his true nature, and only is able to be himself when he is with children, as shown through Sybil. This can relate to the alternate title of slaughterhouse 5, the childrens crusade. Men in war are just children, and Seymour is most comfortable around children, showing that he himself has changed in war. He changed and is now only safe around children, because he is one.
Delete"Yes. Yes, I do," said the young man. "What I like particularly about her is that she
ReplyDeletenever does anything mean to little dogs in the lobby of the hotel. That little toy bull that
belongs to that lady from Canada, for instance. You probably won't believe this, but
some little girls like to poke that little dog with balloon sticks. Sharon doesn't. She's
never mean or unkind. That's why I like her so much." (8)
How does Seymours connection with children showcase the connection between soldiers and children, and how does it connect to Billy in Slaughterhouse 5?
Seymour likes Sharon because she is different from most other kids. She shows kindness, which is opposite to the others at her age who poke the small dogs in the lobby. Seymour is also different, and he finds this connection comforting. He doesn't fit with other young men, and spends his time on the piano or sunbathing, and playing with children. This connects to how Billy showcased "different" behaviour, as he was very closed off and not defined by masculinity unlike other soldiers. Both of these characters don't fit with societies depictions of veterans, and are persecuted by those around them. Seymour finds safety in the innocence of children and happiness in time alone. (he was very far away on the beach, and away from his wife). While Seymour may not show it, he needs this time of peace and comfort because without it, he shows his true state, in the elevator, and eventually shooting himself.
Read online Urdu Digests,Urdu Books,Novels,Magazines,Safarnama,Islamic Books,Education Books,imran series mazhar kaleem And Much More http://zubiweb.net
ReplyDelete