Jonathan

8-VT
16 May 2016
PLAR Essay: Waltzer and the Representation of Evil
The struggle between good and evil is a common archetype in fiction. The
conspicuousness of this idea differs between works, but by and large it is always, at the very
least, somewhat obvious to the reader. Usually, characters are used to represent this struggle and
are placed on opposing sides or fronts. In Leif Engers Peace Like a River, Jape Waltzer is
used as representation of the evil side in a number of ways: his past and future lie in a cloud of
obscurity, he seems to denounce Christ in the book, and he goes against the good people near
the end.
The first of these ideas is that the reader (in addition to the characters in the book) knows
close to nil about Waltzers past or future. This represents evil simply because of the possibility
that he could have done anything during that period. Of course, in the time period in which the
book takes place, he kills Reubens father, further illustrating this point. In the book, Reuben
explains what he thinks became of him after the murder: You should know that Jape Waltzer
proved as uncatchable as Swedes own Valdez. No doubt he went on to mischief elsewhere
(Enger 309). After reading all this, it is left up to the reader to determine for themselves what the
past and future entail. The idea that he has done bad things in the past is somewhat examined
here: I am haunted yet by his patience in the business (Enger 299). When Reuben talks about
how Waltzer set up to shoot them, he notes that he wasnt worried about time and went through
many preparations before the actual event occurred. This suggests that he may have had
experience in similar matters.

The second of these ideas is that Waltzer seems to denounce Christ in the book. This
would be an obvious representation of evil in any book, but the way it is revealed in PLAR is a
bit deeper. The easiest way for the reader to see this in the book is when Reuben goes with Davy
to the cabin for the first time and meets him. When they all sit down to eat, Waltzer thinks
Reuben is praying, and says the following: You are thanking God for the food when He did
not give it to you. I gave it to you and did so freely. Thank me (Enger 233). In this section of the
text, Reuben seems so surprised by this utterance that all he can do is nod his head. Waltzer does
not seem to like the topic of religion here, and acts a bit touchy about it when he tells Reuben to
thank him. It is after this section when the connections begin to stand out to the reader a bit
more. When Reuben passes out on the floor and dreams of the devilish little man again, this is
what he recounts: Now hed lean down and look in my eyes - my lashes felt his breath.
Reuben, he whispered. Look at me. What choice did I have? I opened my eyes. Jape Waltzers
face searched mine as I hope never to be searched again (Enger 237). When the scene is further
examined, it seems that Reuben is making a direct connection to the little man with Waltzer,
which shows that Reuben senses something sinister about him. Another instance of this
connection is when Emil, the pig, goes running through the house after Sara unintentionally steps
on his tail: Waltzer roared, like the devil must at Christian cowardice! (Enger 234). Although
short, this is another important reference that Reuben makes.
The third and final point is that Waltzer goes directly against the good people at the end
of the book. Enger uses the Lands as these people in this story, and when Waltzer ends up killing
Jeremiah near the end, this opposition reaches its climax. It actually appears that Jeremiah knows
before any of this ever happens that they will be confronted by an enemy, even if he doesnt
know who it will be: We and the world will always be at war. Retreat is impossible. Arm

yourselves (Enger 4). How he determines this is uncertain to the reader, but something that is
clear is the fact that he ended up being correct. This idea is proved when the Reuben realizes that
Waltzer is shooting at them. Once this event has taken place, it becomes evident that Reuben has
been right all along. Reuben makes an implication of this earlier in the text when he first meets
him: Despite all I was to learn about this man, he knew how to make a boy welcome (Enger
227). Reuben lets on beforehand that he doesnt know everything about Waltzers true character
at the time.
In conclusion, Waltzer is shown as an evil person by the vagueness of his whole life, his
denunciation of Christ, and his opposition toward the good. What really makes this stand out in
the end is that the premonitions the characters had about him turned out to be true. Beginning
with Jeremiahs revelation about the people who are at war with them, the reader begins to
sense a note of anxiety. As the story continues, there begin to be more and more signs of warning
and bad omens that pop up unexpectedly. Eventually, when Reuben meets Waltzer, the reader can
begin to see that he (Waltzer) appears to be a strange individual; later, it is found that he is a
malicious and evil person. While these claims may have seemed far-fetched and exaggerated to
the reader earlier on, their reality later begins to set in until it is finally realized that not a single
aspect of one of them was wrong. Enger does a very good job at developing the characters into
these archetypal representations of good and evil that are present in any good fiction book.