Alienation and Subsequent Renewal in The Bell Jar and The Catcher in the Rye

“How Do the Authors, Sylvia Plath and J.D Salinger, Use Symbolism to Portray Alienation and Subsequent Renewal in The Bell Jar and The Catcher in the Rye?”

Society is often perceived as the curator of overwhelming expectations, stringent ideals and unaccommodating beliefs. These unwritten social codes frequently clash with one’s beliefs relating to individuality, like gender roles and sexuality. Based in the excessively materialistic American society of the 1950s, Esther and Holden are similar in that they both feel repulsed by the “phoniness” of almost everyone around them. These characters are driven even further to the edge as they battle against the standards of society in self-imposed isolation. With The Catcher in the Rye being The Bell Jar’s immediate precursor, critics often view the novels as mirror images of one another (Lawrence 50). However, the protagonists are quite different in their views on society and how they carry out their quest for renewal or rebirth. Esther also having to combat further restrictions placed upon aspiring women in an era that fails to honour female intellect. Both Plath and Salinger use symbolism to express core themes and messages in their works, such as the struggles in preserving one’s individuality and the effects of stifling social expectations. This is to present the phony and obscene world that we, Esther and Holden are living in. This essay will explore the use of symbols within The Bell Jar and The Catcher in the Rye through three categories: inanimate objects, the embodiment of comfort zones as well as entities that bear a resemblance with the protagonists. Over the course of the novels, Salinger and Plath used symbolism to help readers visualise the extent of teenage angst by portraying alienation and subsequent renewal.

I. The Inanimate Objects To portray Esther’s troubled state of mind, the bell jar is used to illustrate a constant sense of confinement which contributes to her gradual descent into seemingly inescapable depression. The bell jar places Esther on display as per its transparent nature, exposing her inner thoughts to readers while at the same time concealing them from other characters within the novel. This struggle in expression is shown at the very beginning where Esther thinks “I was supposed to be having the time of my life.”, followed by feeling guilty as “other college girls” must be extremely jealous of her (Plath 2). Esther is aware that she is unusual for not feeling overjoyed despite being presented the opportunity to be a guest editor for a fashion magazine based in New York. She reflects upon herself through the eyes of others as if she were placed in a transparent bell jar, creating distance and alienating herself from the materialistic 1950s American society in this way. Although readers know of Esther’s guilt, she does not confide to anyone about her worries as the bell jar restricts her from doing so, further exacerbating the depression that stems from isolation, in which a thin layer of glass separates her from other characters (Moss 178). The bell jar also represents the slow and deliberate pain and suffocation that comes from this separation from society. Esther states that wherever she goes, she “would be sitting under the same glass bell jar, stewing in my own sour air.” (Plath 186). This indicates that her disturbed state of mind and feeling of suffocation is mostly self-inflicted, but she is unable to free her own detached self from the confinement of depression due to the imposing nature of the bell jar. The imagery used here and in “the air of the bell jar wadded round me and I couldn’t stir” symbolises how Esther is rendered helpless as her conscious is slowly being polluted from the inside, where the very air around her is unpleasant and restricting. Although Esther is aware of her situation and suffers from guilt for not enjoying her time as others would, the bell jar is a constant presence that causes alienation and leads to her gradual descent into suicidal madness.

The bell jar is the source of Esther’s impending entrapment and alienation to the extent that it embodies her, so when it is lifted, it is symbolic of her desire for renewal. Esther fears electroshock therapy, stating that electrocution “must be the worst thing in the world.” (Plath 1). Despite that, she undergoes such a few times throughout the course of the novel, often making her descend further into madness, adding to the suffocating nature of the bell jar akin to being placed on the operation table. However, after a session alongside Dr Nolan, her friend, Esther could finally breathe again. She states “The bell jar hung, suspended, a few feet above my head. I was open to circulating air.” (Plath 215). She is no longer suffocating, and ironically, that same electrical power which killed the Rosenbergs in the beginning of the novel restores Esther to life. Shock therapy is what finally lifts the bell jar and allows her to breathe freely once again (Scholes 131). In this sense, the bell jar is portrayed as an object that saves her from its own oppressive nature, allowing it to embody her growth. This is apparent when afterwards, her suicidal thoughts and troubled state of mind dissipates, as evident when Esther forgets why she had loved knives so much. Yet, one may interpret this as a loss of self. As she rids herself of her source of depression, the bell jar, she also loses her true contemplative self. Plath emphasises this loss of self through disorientating time skips following the seemingly liberating electroshock therapy session, leaving readers to wonder if Esther really had an epiphany or not. On top of that, the bell jar is “a few feet” above her head, symbolising how Esther is still under the threat of its potential re-descension. This perhaps represents how Esther will never be able to escape her pained self, and that her depression will inevitably consume her thoughts once again. Esther contemplated this herself in “How did I know that someday — at college, in Europe, somewhere, anywhere — the bell jar, with its stifling distortions, wouldn’t descend again?” (Plath 241). Although she knows that the bell jar has been lifted, she has not fully reconciled with society, nor with herself.

Holden’s red hunting hat is a symbol of his individuality, and is used similarly as the bell jar, to represent his alienation from society. The people he interacts with often points out his hat, singling out him as strange and different. This partially caused his alienation and self-imposed isolation. On top of that, Holden challenges the widely-accepted definition of the hunting hat, claiming that it is a “people shooting hat” (Salinger 26). His proclamation allows the hat to symbolise his rejection of societal codes, or his distaste for people of the materialistic 1950s in general, exemplifying his isolation from society. His dorm-mate, Ackley, completely ignores his statement and opts to steer the conversation to something he himself fancies, suggesting that Holden isolates himself due to the apathy of those around him. However, Holden is, in fact, very self-conscious of his hat. He seeks others’ approval, asking “I got it in New York this morning… Ya like it?” (Salinger 34). The hunting hat is not only symbolic of Holden’s self-imposed isolation but also his subconscious hunt for companionship, recognition and acceptance (Pachecano). Both Ackley and Holden’s roommate Stradlater finds thehunting hat peculiar and asks Holden about it, but they do not care for his explanation, which further emphasises Holden’s disconnection with society and his peers. However, the hunting hat is also liberating at times, as Holden is able to carry out actions he would not normally do otherwise, for instance, yelling at the top of his voice “Sleep tight, ya morons!” at his dorm mates, then promptly leaving (Salinger 59). The hat gives him confidence, be it true or feigned, to keep himself in check through expressing his untapped uniqueness and individuality. The red hunting hat is liberating, while the bell jar is suffocating. The hat is a tangible object that reflects Holden’s subconscious need for approval, while Esther is conscious of her depression but is rendered unable to deal with it due to the imposing nature of the intangible jar.

The red hunting hat also places Holden on the road to renewal when it begins to lose its initial purpose of protecting him from society and alienation. The hat is symbolic of childhood, as its colour is the same as his younger siblings’ hair, allowing Holden to associate it with the innocence and purity of children. He wears it to maintain a connection with both qualities, and in particular with his deceased younger brother, Allie. However, this profound link is constantly tested throughout the novel, often by the uncaring society that Holden finds “phony”. This is evident after he accidentally shatters the Shirley Beans record he purchased for Phoebe, promptly tossing Holden to a new low. During this pivotal moment, he states “Boy, I was still shivering like a bastard, and the back of my hair, even though I had my hunting hat on, was sort of full of little hunks of ice.” (Salinger 171). Holden realises that his hunting hat is not an effective tool to separate himself from society as he previously assumed. Although it distinguishes himself from the “phonies”, he will still be unavoidably hurt. He chooses to relinquish ownership of the hat towards the end of the novel by handing over the hat to Phoebe. While Esther reaches an epiphany when the bell jar lifts from her head temporarily, relieving her of suffocation, Holden reaches his when the hunting hat fails to protect him. Yet, Phoebe returns the hat to Holden right before she goes on the carousel, symbolising how Holden will be unable to sever the link he has established with his younger siblings, much like how Esther’s bell jar is only a few feet above her head, never quite free of her suicidal thoughts. When it rains, the parents accompanying their children rush to stand under the roof of the carousel while Holden stays on his bench, separated from others. He states “My hunting hat really gave me quite a lot of protection, in a way, but I got soaked anyway.” (Salinger 233). Unlike before, Holden is hyper-aware of how the hat fails to shield him from society, but he has already fully accepted this fact and chooses to move on, watching Phoebe happily from afar. Towards the end of the novel, Esther is still under the threat of the jar descending once more and cutting her from the outside world. Holden now wears the red hunting hat as per his sister’s request, and not due to a desire alienate himself from society.

II. The Comfort Zones In The Bell Jar, Esther often expresses the need for purification, which can be read as a desire for renewal. She “purifies” herself through submerging herself into a body of water after stressful experiences. As a comfort zone, it shelters her from the outside world, which effectively furthers her isolation since she chooses to distance herself from society. She states “I never feel so much myself as when I'm in a hot bath.” (Plath 20). This coping mechanism allows her to keep in touch with her own self. It is like a ritual, where she declares "I don't believe in baptism or the waters of Jordan or anything like that, but I guess I feel about a hot bath the way those religious people feel about holy water." (Plath 20). Esther views water as a means for rebirth after being exposed to the dirtiness of her surroundings. This divine feeling of renewal after a hot bath is apparent in “I felt pure and sweet as a new baby”, where water symbolisesEsther’s desire to feel pure again, and thus represents her need to separate herself from the ‘dirty’ society. However, quite ironically, she was forced awake by a drunken Doreen who vomits in front of her room in the middle of the night. Although Esther is shown to admire and idolise Doreen, she “felt angry at Doreen for waking [her] up.” (Plath 20). This anger corresponds to Esther’s realisation that she may never be able to fully escape from the outside world. Her surroundings will always find a way to contaminate her, even when she is secluded in her comfort zone. When Esther is overwhelmed with suicidal thoughts, at one point in the novel, she imagines killing herself by drowning. She thinks the “water looked amiable and welcoming” and thought “drowning must be the kindest way to die.” (Plath 157). Once again, water symbolises Esther’s hope for renewal. She wishes to start a new life by ridding herself from her current contaminated state by killing herself in the comforting and welcoming water.

Holden’s comfort zone is the Museum of Natural History, which serves as a symbol of alienation caused by his desire for familiarity. The Museum embodies permanence — Holden relies heavily on the Museum as a comfort zone due to his need for a familiar place, which deepens his isolation as he secludes himself further from the outside world. He states that the best thing about the museum “was that everything always stayed right where it was. Nobody’d move.” (Salinger 135). Holden, like Esther, craves a place of comfort that is familiar and unaffected by the outside world. The museum is his way of escaping the phoniness and unpredictable nature of society. However, although the artefacts within the museum are immune to the ever-changing world, Holden is troubled by how he himself changes every time he enters, stating “Nobody'd be different. The only thing that would be different would be you.” (135). Holden is bothered by the fact that even though he constantly tries to escape the unpredictable world around him, he is not exempted from the march of time. This explains why Holden chooses not to enter the museum when waiting for Phoebe, saying “Then a funny thing happened. When I got to the museum, all of a sudden I wouldn’t have gone inside for a million bucks” (Salinger 136). He thinks of the loss of permanence, more specifically how Phoebe will inevitably change every time she steps in the museum. By deciding not to enter, Holden attempts to stop the flow of time in order to preserve the familiarity he is so used to. He further alienates himself from society, due to his refusal to accept the natural flow of things. Towards the end of the novel, Holden visits the museum again as “there wasn’t any place else to go” (Salinger 222). Although he now views the museum as his last resort instead of a place he would often visit like in the past, he still, in a way, clings onto the comfort provided by the familiarity of the museum. However, like Esther, Holden is unable to escape the dirtiness of the outside world. This is evident in “It was so nice and peaceful. Then, all of a sudden, you’d never guess what I saw on the wall. Another ‘Fuck you’” (Salinger 224). Both Esther and Holden were abruptly awakened by their surroundings, one from vomit and one from vulgarity. The museum is no longer the sanctuary he once viewed it to be, he even states “You can’t ever find a place that’s nice and peaceful, because there isn’t any.” (224). The unpredictability of society successfully found its way into his comfort zone, forcing him to step out and face the outside world. While Esther constantly seeks relief in water throughout the novel, Holden was forced to recognise that his comfort zone is, in fact, not as it seems. This places Holden onto a path to renewal since his very source of alienation, the Museum, has been exposed.

III. The Entities of Resemblance Plath starts The Bell Jar on a strained and detached tone, immediately shaping the voice of Esther and relates her to the wronged Rosenbergs, allowing the theme of alienation to take form at the very beginning of the novel. The opening line “It was a queer, sultry summer, the summer they electrocuted the Rosenbergs...” reveals Esther’s preoccupation with death while foreshadowing her unpleasant experience with undergoing electroshock therapy in the near future. Plath ends the opening line with “and I didn’t know what I was doing in New York.” By mentioning the Rosenbergs’ electrocution alongside Esther’s displacement in the city, it shows that she is deeply disturbed by both factors. The Rosenbergs were convicted of spying for Soviet Union and thus sentenced to death by electrocution. They were “the first Americans to be convicted and executed for espionage during peacetime and their case remains controversial to this day” (“Julius and Ethel Rosenberg Execution”). Esther identifies herself with the Rosenbergs as they were unfairly cast out by the then paranoid American society of the nuclear era. For Esther, the excessively materialistic 1950s society was what repels her and causes her alienation. The mention of the Rosenbergs adds to Esther’s “growing sense of alienation from the cultural demands and images of women” (Bonds 51). This is shown when Esther tries to make conversation with a colleague by bringing up the Rosenbergs. Instead of agreeing with her about how awful the execution is, as Esther would assume, Hilda replies, “I’m so glad they’re going to die.” The reference to the Rosenbergs is symbolic of Esther’s alienation, and their death represents, to her, the ruthlessness of an unjust, uncaring world. Hilda’s reply only deepens Esther’s separation from conventional society’s viewpoints, intensifying the feeling of alienation.

Holden often asks where the ducks in the Central Park lagoon go during the winter, deepening his alienated role within the novel. He first identifies with the ducks when Mr. Spencer goes off on a tangent about life and school. Holden states “I was wondering if some guy came in a truck and took them away to a zoo or something, or if they just flew away” (Salinger 13). Here, Holden worries about his future as to how he worries for the ducks in the pond, wondering whether he would be taken away or would he have to deal with his own problems, evidently still trapped within his youthful thinking. He hopes to find an answer to his question of the whereabouts of the ducks just as how he is searching for a solution to his own predicaments and to finally rid himself from the pain of alienation. After leaving Pencey Prep, he calls a cab and asks the cab driver the whereabouts of the ducks, in which the driver “turned around and looked at me like I was a madman. ‘What’re ya tryna do, bud?’ He said. ‘Kid me?’” (Salinger 68). Asking about ducks is rather strange and not often pondered upon by others, thus the ducks also symbolise Holden’s alienation from the rest of the world. His questions often puzzle the common passersby, much like how his red hunting hat garners attention. On his next cab ride, Holden asks about the ducks once again. Despite his childlike persistence, this shows Holden’s burgeoning desire to solve his own predicaments, showing that he is in fact slowly maturing. The cab driver, Horwitz, first responds with a flurry of impassive questions such as “what about it?”, “where who goes?”, and “How the hell should I know a stupid (emphasis added) thing like that?” (Salinger 91). Horwitz even makes a remark about how the fishes “don’t go no place”. While Holden stresses on the ducks, Horwitz comments on the fishes. Their obvious discord illustrates Holden’s disconnection from society. Holden’s worries and his self-projection (on the ducks) are viewed as “stupid” and insignificant and are neglected. Others are apathetic to Holden’s problems and only wish to assert their own opinions on him. Although Holden never manages to find the ducks, he gradually learns that he must adapt to society, like how the ducks have adapted to the harsh cold winter. As opposed to the Rosenbergs who were helpless in the face of an uncaring society and who died because of that, the ducks have learnt to flee and adapt to the changing of seasons. This creates a striking contrast between Esther and Holden — while Esther attempts to take her own life several times throughout the novel and never quite showed signs of successful rehabilitation, Holden accepts his fate and decides to let his worries go, leading to his renewal.

Conclusion

Plath and Salinger both used symbolism to depict the impact of alienation on Esther and Holden, though not all were used to support them on their quest for renewal. Holden’s red hunting hat, the Museum of Natural History and the ducks in the Central Park lagoon do not provide concrete answers to his dilemmas, and are unable to protect him from the cruelty of society. Yet, ironically, by failing Holden, they assisted him (directly or indirectly) on his path to renewal, offering a fresh perspective on society as well as on his own disturbed state of being. On the other hand, Esther’s looming bell jar, the false comfort of water and her self-projections on the Rosenbergs have, in many ways, led to an affirmation to the descent into her previous disturbed state of mind. These symbols further alienate her from society, intensifying her suicidal tendencies, and ultimately leading to a conclusion that is not favourable to Esther’s mental wellbeing. Therefore, it is the emancipation from what the symbols embody that leads to renewal. The most intriguing is whether renewal indicates the loss of individuality, or rather a nudge towards maturity. And whether the reconciliation with society is portrayed to be more essential for renewal than a reconciliation with oneself. Although Holden and Esther are uncannily similar in their suffering, the handling of their own respective situations, as well as their subsequent renewal differ immeasurably. The use of symbolism allows readers to visualise the complexity of their situation, and through symbols and the characters’ handling of them, readers are able to appreciate the substantially different endings for two very similar characters.

Bibliography

Bonds, Diane S. “The Separative Self in Sylvia Plath's The Bell Jar.” Women's Studies, vol. 18, no. 1, 1990, pp. 49–64.

History.com Editors. “Julius and Ethel Rosenberg Execution.” History.com, A&E

Television Networks, www.history.com/this-day-in-history/julius-and-ethel-rosenberg-executed. Accessed on 28 October. 2018.

Lawrence, Erica. “Salvation and Rebirth in The Catcher in the Rye and The Bell Jar.”

pp. 50-66

Moss, Howard. “Whatever Is Moving ‘Sylvia Plath, Dying: An Introduction’” Little, Brown, 1981. pp. 176–181

Pachecano, Roberto: “Parents: A Cause for Rebellion”. Writer, Poet and EssayistRoberto Pachecano. 28 Mar. 2002. Web. 13 Mar. 2013.

Plath, Sylvia. “The Bell Jar”. Harper Row, 1993.

Salinger, J. D. “The Catcher in the Rye”. Boston: Little, Brown, 1951. Print.

Scholes, Robert. “Esther Came Back Like a Retreaded Tire”. The New York Times, 1971. p. 131

Shaw, Peter. “Love and Death in The Catcher in the Rye”. New Essays on The Catcher in the Rye. Ed. Jack Salzman. Cambridge University Press, 1991.