Deal Me In Challenge: For Esmé—with Love and Squalor by J.D. Salinger

Card Drawn:

Shhhh...it's me. J.D. 

I will always have a soft spot for J.D. Salinger because he was instrumental during my formative years when reading became my obsession. After being introduced to Catcher in the Rye along with a few of his other short-stories by my high-school English teacher (thank you Mrs. Bordo!), my intense passion for literature sent me into a complete reading frenzy--hence, the name of my blog. Catcher in the Rye was a cathartic experience and unlike anything I had ever encountered before up until that point. It was as if a switch went off in my brain allowing me to recognize that fiction could be so much more than just entertaining stories--it was an art form capable of evoking powerful emotions while connecting with me on a deeply personal level. From that moment on I wanted to be writer just like Salinger, or at the very least, become an English teacher so that maybe one day I could inspire a new generation of young people to fall in love with literature. Suffice it to say, my life turned out quite different than initially planned. Years down the road I eventually got around to reading Franny and Zooey (my review can be found HERE), which blew me away. Salinger could do no wrong in my eyes. It has been nine years since I have read anything else by him so you can understand my excitement and high expectations for this story.

"For Esme with Love and Squalor" is proving to be one of the most difficult reviews to write for the DMI challenge because it left me with so many mixed feelings. I have read this story twice now and still cannot decide if it is worthy of all the hype or a flawed piece of cloying sentimentalism. I seem to fall somewhere in the middle. Many critics would probably agree that Salinger's writing was molded by his traumatic experiences in WWII and this story is explicit in its portrayal of a solider suffering from PTSD before this diagnosis was even properly recognized by the medical community as a legitimate psychological condition. The narrative is split into two sections: Part 1 is the first person narrative by an unnamed solider before going to training camp and his encounter with the young choir girl at the tea shop. Part 2 switches to a third person narrator and follows the mysterious Sergeant X who is stationed at a military recovery home after the war is over. 

Salinger, of course, delights in teasing the reader through misdirection, ambiguity and withholding key information--he only offers us a fragmented glimpse into the lives of these characters. Moreover, it is also important to keep in mind that the solider claims to be a "professional short-story writer" and is self-conscious about the art of fiction. He is consciously aware about the actual narrative process, subtly drawing attention to the story's artifice through irony and parody. The ironic tone is most prevalent in the first section, especially during the lengthy scene at the tea shop when the solider and Esme meet after she first captures his attention while singing at a church choir practice. She is a precocious thirteen year old girl and her adult sophistication is deliberate on Salinger's part; reminding the reader of the text's artifice, undermining certain expectations and the desire for verisimilitude. She is meant to appear contrived and much of her dialogue feels forced, almost unnatural. If Esme is to be understood as a metaphorical representation of innocence, purity and unconditional love, then Salinger seems to be parodying such sentimental notions. Are we to believe that they share a genuine love for each other after only a brief meeting? The whole situation is absurd and that is the point. The subject of writing comes up during their conversation and she asks the solider to write a story for her: "Make it extremely squalid and moving," she suggested. "Are you at all acquainted with squalor?" Notice that Esme misinterprets the meaning of "squalor" and this inherent irony is the main thematic link between Part 1 and Part 2: the quixotic notion that love conquers the squalor of war.

Another example of the narrator's self-reflexivity occurs when he directly addresses the reader in the first section before the story transitions into the second part with Sergeant X: 

"This is the squalid, or moving, part of the story, and the scene changes. The people change too. I'm still around, but from here on in, for reasons I am not at liberty to disclose, I've disguised myself so cunningly that even the cleverest reader will fail to recognize me."

Again, Salinger is being deliberately playful here, emphasizing the unreliable narrator's self-conscious mediation of the actual story. Sergeant X is not fooling anyone about his true identity and that is why it is so important recognize the use of irony and parodic elements at work in Part 1. The juxtaposition between innocence (Esme) and the squalor of war (filth, chaos, death) becomes most pronounced by Sergeant X's nervous breakdown. The reader must decide for themselves if love conquers squalor but it is impossible for me not to interpret the ending as a parody of sentimentalism: Esme sends her dead father's wrist-watch to Sergeant X and this romantic gesture of love supposedly cures him of his PTSD. This scene is exaggerated as parody, further highlighting the story's preoccupation with artifice. The final line is indicative of the self-conscious narrator's mimetic narrative construction: "You take a really sleepy man, Esme, and he always stands a chance of again becoming a man with all his fac--with all his f-a-c-u-l-t-i-e-s intact." Paradoxically, Sergeant X is the story's authorial voice, as he attempts to create a sense of order and meaning within his damaged psyche caused by the "squalor" of war.

I'm so torn. There is much to admire in this story such as Salinger's deft prose and ironic sensibility. However, the narrative can feel tedious and also quite frustrating in its idiosyncratic style, especially during the first section. Objectively, I can see why this is such a celebrated short-story but for me, the self-conscious artifice and parody takes away from the story's emotional impact. Maybe a third reading will change my mind.