“A
hot tin roof’s ‘n uncomfo’table place t’stay on"
Believe it or not, this play was not
deliberately chosen to follow on some sort of theme that I have managed to have
going through my last posts. I was not even aware of Tennessee Williams’
homosexuality until I began my research for A
Passage to India! It has, however, made my reading experience more
interesting, as there has been a lot of thematic crossover between this play
and the previous novel, not least when it comes to ideas of prejudice and
gender expectations. I have to say, I am not Williams’ biggest fan; I
appreciate he was a very good playwright, but there is just something in the
style that I am not crazy about. Nonetheless, I believe I have found a few
interesting things to pick out and take a look at.
Cat on
a Hot Tin Roof
premiered in 1955, when Tennessee Williams was forty-four. As with most of his
works, critics tend to draw the conclusion that there is a strong link between
the characters and events in Williams’ plays and the experiences he had within
his own family. His father was an alcoholic travelling salesman and his mother
was the archetypal Southern Belle, snobbish and, at times, verging on
hysterical. Williams was particularly close to his sister, Rose, who suffered
with mental illness throughout her life. The lobotomy she underwent is said to
have horrified Williams profoundly. For much of his childhood, Williams’ main
companions were his sister and his black nursemaid. I would question the
assertion that it is this that caused his sympathetic treatment of female
characters and suggest that it is a too simplistic conclusion, but this is,
perhaps, a personal choice. Williams was sickly child and was apparently quite
effeminate, something which his father was not happy about. Tennessee Williams,
a gay man in a homophobic USA, struggled throughout his life with depression,
alcoholism and a heavy dependence on prescription drugs. These experiences and
circumstances, I believe, gave him a very unique insight into the struggles of
the characters he created.
Gender expectations and boundaries is
something that I again feel compelled to return to as a focal point. It is
quite obvious that Brick does not fit the expectations of his sex from the
offset, due to his probable homosexuality. He is weak, and in his weakness he
is cruel. Brick is the archetypal alcoholic in this sense – selfish, needy when
it comes to drink, even a little lost. He is not masculine in the traditional
sense; he drinks, he does not take action when it comes to his marriage and he
does not assert himself. Even his broken ankle is symbolic of his emasculated
impotence. Interestingly, Brick fails to take advantage of the fact that his
possible homosexuality could be accepted by both his wife and his father, the
latter even going so far as to say, ‘“Always, anyhow, lived with too much space
around me to be infected by the ideas of other people. One thing you can grow
on a big place more important than cotton! – is tolerance! – I grown it.”’ – p. 78. All of the prejudice and
disgust that Brick must contend with appears to come directly from himself:
‘“You think we did dirty things between us… You think Skipper and me were a
pair of dirty old men?” – p.77. I would infer from this that Brick really did love Skipper, and that it pains him
to think that the feelings he had could be summarised by a few sexual acts.
Of course, the rest of the world would
probably not have been as accepting, but it is easy to forget this when reading
Cat on a Hot Tin Roof because the
family is so close, it almost does not feel like there is an outside world – life on the plantations seems to be that
oppressive. I believe one would find it difficult to avoid looking at the
character of Brick through a ‘biographical lens’, as it were, as Williams’ own
homosexuality and experiences as an effeminate child must have had some bearing
on the creation of a character so unable to meet the gender expectations thrust
upon him.
I personally found Maggie to be a far more
interesting character than Brick. Her own challenging of gender confines is far
more complex; on the one hand, she is child-like and naïve (‘“It was one of
those beautiful, ideal thing they tell you about in Greek legends…”’ – p.42),
while on the other hand, she is sexually aware and actually displays sexual
needs of her own, such as when she challenges Big Mama, saying, ‘“Why don’t you
ask if he makes me happy in bed?”’ –
p.35. Maggie is, therefore, nowhere near to being the ideal ‘good’ woman. The
following passage, again from Critical
Theory Today, is possibly quite interesting to look at now:
‘… Patriarchal ideology suggests that there are only two identities a woman can have. If she accepts her traditional gender role and obeys the patriarchal rules, she’s a “good girl”; if she doesn’t, she’s a “bad girl”… “Bad girls” violate patriarchal sexual norms in some way…’.
I think it is important to consider this
element of the play, even if it may seem a minor point to some other readers. It
all comes back to an analysis of the strength of gender confines; Maggie cares
for her own sexual needs but is unable to convince her husband to sleep with
her, thus failing to be ‘sexually attractive’. In addition, Maggie has yet to conceive
a child, which, in comparison to Mae and Gooper, means that both Maggie and
Brick have failed to achieve something which is essential to their fulfilling
their gender roles, albeit it in different ways. A woman’s femininity is partly
expressed through her child-rearing, while a man’s masculinity is partly
expressed through his virility and ability to ‘sire’ a child.
One final point I would like to touch upon
is the question of who is responsible for one’s happiness. Brick’s failure to
support Skipper, and his rejection of his friend, had an unfortunate result.
Brick is obviously feeling very guilty, as though taking on a belated responsibility
towards his friend’s happiness. However, he does nothing to make his father’s
life easier and more comfortable and is, at times, actually cruel to his wife. Meanwhile,
Big Daddy treats his own wife appallingly, while she herself still hangs upon
his every word and whim to reach her own satisfaction. The entire dysfunctional
family is so uncomfortably close to one another, while all the while plotting
against, and failing to take any responsibility for, each other.
Ultimately, I understand the appeal of
Williams’ work and his play was fairly enjoyable. I suspect it simply wasn’t to
my own personal taste, and, after all, a play is generally written to be
performed instead of read. I would be very interested to see what others have
thought on the ideas I have mentioned so, as always, feel free to leave a
comment.
Thanks for reading,
- -
K
No comments:
Post a Comment