Bennett

He Liked Me, So I Loved Him: A Critique of Social Stereotypes and the Loss of Female Identity in Tennessee Williamss The Glass Menagerie, Suddenly Last Summer, and, The Eccentricities of a Nightingale

Katie Bennett John Lane 20th Century American Drama Duquesne University Fall Semester 2013

Bennett Social structures that influence reality are presented, analyzed, and critiqued throughout works of drama. It is in these representations that major faults with the specificities of a social hierarchy can be examined. In his body of work, Tennessee Williams addressed many of the issues prevalent in twentieth century America. Perhaps one of his strongest critiques exists

within his analysis of gender roles and their influence over romantic relationships between males and females. Throughout his plays, Williams addresses the implications of a paradigm that places men in a position of power over women. The archetype suggests that women must fulfill certain expectations of their male superiors. To review this societal assumption, the stereotypes are caricatured to such an extent that the gender roles become an absurdity. Williams creates women so debilitated by the feminine norms that they completely lose their identities to predominantly inadequate males. In The Glass Menagerie, Suddenly Last Summer, and The Eccentricities of a Nightingale, the depiction of weak female characters that idolize flawed male figures critiques a type of unconditional love that results in the loss of an independent female identity. This is addressed primarily through the examination of both male and female characteristics and how their interaction eliminates the female persona. Likewise, the critique is strengthened through various symbolic and allegorical references to further indicate the romantic relationships of this type, and the overarching social structure, are both highly problematic. Before discussing the construction of gender in drama, the characteristics associated with both males and females in society must be examined. Western culture has constructed gender identity into two stereotypes-- masculinity for those biologically male and femininity for biological females. Though masculinity and femininity are highly fluid, in many cultures people believe male and female stereotypes represent fundamental gender differences, and while some blending is acceptable there are social consequences for diverging too far from the social

Bennett scripts of gender.1 There is a certain dissonance between the expectations of masculinity and femininity, and failure to comply with these anticipated norms may negatively affect ones existence in society. The general stereotypes associated with the two genders place males in a position of power over submissive females. One manner of viewing these different expectations is that the gender called man, culturally defined in its manhood, often needs to reject the gender called woman, itself culturally defined in its womanhood, by distinguishing itself as strong, powerful, controlling, and often aggressive and violent.2 This pervasive stereotype indicates a certain inequality in interpersonal male-female relationships. When a male and a female interact based on these characteristics, it is suggested that the contact's success will be dependent on the expectations and satisfaction of the male. This anticipation is furthered through the belief that women should be sexually available, domestic, a surprisingly good cook and at all times attractively dressed while men have the more substantial qualities of sexual aggression, potent[cy], financial success, and social accept[ability].3 The anticipations depicted by these stereotypes support the colloquial phrase Life begins with Man. This idiom, and the culture

that has perpetuated its use, indicates that a womans worth and identity are important only in the ways that she performs the roles that keep a man emotionally and physically invested in their relationship. Tennessee Williams caricatures many of the aforementioned stereotypes to such an extent that their absurdity clearly critiques gender expectations. In The Glass Menagerie, Suddenly

William J. Chambliss and Diana S. Eglitis, Discover Sociology, (Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications, Inc., 2014), 210-211. 2 Paula Ruth Gilbert, Discourses of Female Violence and Societal Gender Stereotypes, Violence Against Women 8, no. 1271 (2002): 1274, doi: 10.1177/107780102762478019 3 Alan Sinfield, Sexuality and Power, (New York: Columbia University Press, 2004), 93.

Bennett Last Summer, and The Eccentricities of a Nightingale, the female characters are constructed as highly weak and even emotionally unstable after a failed encounter with a male. To accompany

these female depictions, Williams creates flawed male characters that emanate some of the worst features of male stereotypes. He places particular emphasis on pride, manipulation, and potent sexuality. Consequentially, these men are not worthy of the type of love that jeopardizes the womens psychological wellbeing and overall identity. It is important to note that in the context of the overall plot, the male characters are not exceptionally diabolical. The qualities that make them unworthy of the love of the female characters become particularly contemptible because of the negative consequences within the relationships they attempt with frailly constructed women. Rather, the inability of the men to recognize the problems they have caused makes the characteristics far more deplorable in these relationships than they are within the larger context of the male personality. Therefore, these masculine qualities must be evaluated based on the circumstances of the encounters with the women and, furthermore, on the negative effects that result. While it may be argued that the qualities are not necessarily problematic, it is their influence over the construction of these weak women, and the failure of the men to address the consequences, that becomes the major issue. The degree to which these females become emotionally engaged prevents them from reverting to any sense of self that may have existed before the attachment. Williams himself addresses the problem of reverting to a previous way of life in his treatise The Catastrophe of Success. While he primarily comments on his life before and after the success of The Glass Menagerie, the sentiments about fame hold true when they are applied to unhealthy, unconditional love. Williams writes, One does not escape that easily from the seduction of an effete way of life. You cannot arbitrarily say to yourself, I will now continue my

Bennett life as it was before this thing, success, happened to me.4 By replacing the word success in Williamss statement with love, the meaning does not change. After a relationship has ended, it is impossible to return to life as it was before. Rather, the experiences will have permanently altered views on love and life in general. Within these plays, female characters serve as an example of this perspective, as they are unable to recover from their failed attempts at loving a man. This failure to move on, however, is largely a consequence of the gender roles expected within the relationships. The women are constructed as so subservient that they cannot escape the influence of the men. Williams presents this relational imbalance in such an irrational manner that it becomes a critique of the societal expectations of interactions between men and women. The problematic nature of the relationships within each of these plays is further evidenced through the use of symbolism. Each work has defining images that reinforce this blind, unconditional love as something that strips a woman of her uniqueness, devours her

identity, and is a great burden. These symbols combine with the portrayals of both sexes to offer a critique on the societal expectations of men and women and how the fulfillment of these expectations ultimately damages the female persona. Perhaps one of the clearest depictions of the problem of male-female relationships fundamentally based on gender stereotypes subsists within Williamss first great success, The Glass Menagerie. The plays two main female characters, Laura Wingfield and her mother, Amanda, are constructed as extremely weak willed. As such, they are unable to retain their identities after failed relationships with unworthy male figures. Amandas own inability to

Tennessee Williams, The Catastrophe of Success, in The Theatre of Tennessee Williams, Volume 1, (New York: New Directions Publishing Corporation, 1971), 139-140.

Bennett recover after a man betrays her heavily influences Laura to behave similarly. Therefore, it is necessary to first examine the relationship between Amanda and the estranged Mr. Wingfield. The exposition of the drama conveys that Amandas husband left his family a number of years ago and has only been in contact with them once since leaving. Mr. Wingfield is defined as an inherently selfish being, abandoning his family in favor of his own pursuits. This

egocentricity makes him unworthy of Amandas love and yet, he maintains a prominent position in her life. Despite his physical absence, the Wingfield home is characterized by his presence, as a large portrait of him remains the focal point of the main room. Though he has not been around for a number of years, Mr. Wingfields dominance over his family is just as potent as if he still lived in the house. As such, Amanda continues to be completely consumed with the telephone man who fell in love with long distances...and skipped the light fantastic out of town5 Instead of forgetting Mr. Wingfield, Amanda permits him to supervise the family and exercise influence over her life even from a distance. The true problem with Amanda and Mr. Wingfields relationship is that his leaving made her so fearful of abandonment. Rather than feeling that he has deserted her and the family, Amanda keeps the photo hanging, allowing him governance over their lives. When she speaks about Mr. Wingfield, Amanda says, I married a man who worked for the telephone company! That gallantly smiling gentleman over there! [She points to the picture.]Now he travels and I dont even know where! But what am I going on for about mytribulations.6 Because of her fear of being alone without a man to serve as guidance, Amanda allows Mr. Wingfields presence to permeate her life, thoughts, and actions. He has become such an integral part of who

Tennessee Williams, The Glass Menagerie, in The Theatre of Tennessee Williams, Volume 1, (New York: New Directions Publishing Corporation, 1971), 145. 6 Williams, The Glass Menagerie, 204.

Bennett

she is, that removing his picture from the house would be effectively removing herself. To keep a reminder of the past, Amanda permits the photo to remain. Without his perpetual presence smiling forever,7 Amanda would not know how to continue with her daily life. Removing the photograph would leave nothing of Mr. Wingfield but a postcard that says Hello-Goodbye!8 which is simply not enough for her to use to construct an identity. Amandas identity, then, has been relinquished to the past. She chooses to remember the times when men were prominent in her life, as that is what she believes is meaningful. In this remembrance, she does not feel abandoned but rather can pretend that nothing has changed. Amandas identity has been completely eradicated to the degree that she has a singular focus on men, both those she used to date and those that may come to call on her daughter. In this singularity, Amanda suggests that a womans worth is defined by the number of men loving her. She vocalizes this by reminiscing, One Sunday afternoon in Blue Mountain- your mother received- seventeen!- gentlemen callers! Why, sometimes there werent chairs enough to accommodate them all.9 Amanda concentrates on these tales of her past to such an extent that it does not appear she lives in present reality. Instead, she clings to the times when she was involved with men, evidenced by the portrait of her estranged husband and the retelling of these stories. It is in this past that she is able to find a semblance of herself. The exaggerated emphasis of her stories, as well as Amandas continual stress on the importance of men in both her life and Lauras, indicates a critique of the gender roles prescribed to males and females. Amanda is defined only by men and, as such, she does not have an identity outside of the presentation of the cultural stereotypes of being sexually available,

7 8

Williams, The Glass Menagerie, 144. Williams, The Glass Menagerie, 145. 9 Williams, The Glass Menagerie, 148.

Bennett domestic, a surprisingly good cook and at all times attractively dressed.10 Additionally, Amanda believes that being a barely tolerated spinster11 is the worst fate a woman could endure. The absurdity of Amandas assumptions, as well as the negative construction of her absent husband, indicates that the cultural stereotype of the weak female character that

unconditionally loves an unworthy male is highly flawed. Amanda is completely defined by the men in her life, leaving her without an identity of her own creation. When she is left without a definable individuality, Amanda continually retreats into the past where men loved her, as that is where she feels her lost identity resides. The need of a man denotes that Amandas self-worth is entirely dictated by satisfying males and receiving their acknowledgement. Amandas lack of identity critiques the cultural stereotype that a woman belongs to herself only if she also belongs to a man. Even further, Amanda attempts to commodify these ideals about masculinity and femininity to other women through her selling of womens magazines and brassieres. Amanda is wrapped up in her own illusion12 to the point that she must force the stereotyped gender roles she has been living within onto others. Tom, Amandas son, describes The Homemakers Companion as the type of journal that features the serialized sublimations of ladies of letters who think in terms of delicate cuplike breasts, slim, tapering waists, rich, creamy thighs, eyes like wood smoke in autumn, fingers that soothe and caress like strains of music, bodies as powerful as Etruscan sculpture.13 This magazine is an episodic guide to the perpetuation of the female stereotype that a womans worth is dependent upon her sexual prowess and ability to
10 11

Sinfield, Sexuality and Power, 93 Williams, The Glass Menagerie, 156. 12 Roger B. Stein, The Glass Menagerie Revisited: Catastrophe without Violence, Tennessee Williams: A Collection of Critical Essays, ed. Stephen S. Stanton (Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall, Inc., 1977), 37. 13 Williams, The Glass Menagerie, 159.

Bennett keep house. No only is Amanda a consumer of these ideas herself, she becomes a vendor of

societal expectations and sells them to other women to perpetuate the perceived ideal qualities of womanhood. Ultimately, Amanda attempts to sell these ideals to her daughter, Laura, who also loses her identity because of a failed encounter with an unworthy male. Louise Blackwell suggests in her article Tennessee Williams and the Predicament of Women that Lauras faults originate from having learned to be maladjusted through adjustment to abnormal family relationships.14 In other words, Laura has learned the cultural stereotypes of how she should act as a woman from her highly flawed mother. As such, she places too much emphasis on a male character and creates herself based on the successes and failures of a romantic relationship. While most women do, in fact, learn how to navigate the social world from their mothers, Laura is especially impressionable because of a preexisting condition that has lessened her self-confidence. Amandas emphasis on men is particularly problematic because Laura believes herself naturally inferior and unable to fulfill the expectations of her mother and men as a whole. Lauras construction as a weak person derives from a fragility caused by a physical disability. In the description of his characters, Williams notes, a childhood illness has left [Laura] crippled, one leg slightly shorter than the other, and held in a brace.15 From a very young age, Laura has believed that she is somehow less than others because of her disability. This contributes significantly to a low opinion of herself that therefore permeates the rest of her life. Because of her low self-esteem, Laura suffers from an anxiety problem that has caused her to drop out of business school. To avoid telling Amanda the truth, she hides at the library all day

14

Louise Blackwell, Tennessee Williams and the Predicament of Women, South Atlantic Bulletin, 32, no. 2 (1970): 9, http://www.jstor.org/stable/3197002 15 Williams, The Glass Menagerie, 129.

Bennett 10 until she is expected home. When Amanda discovers that Laura no longer attends school, she suggests that the only alternative is to find a man to marry. As she stands next to the portrait of Mr. Wingfield, Amanda propositions, Girls that arent cut out for business careers usually wind up married to some nice manSister, thats what youll do!16 Laura responds in a tone of frightened apology, But, Mother Imcrippled!17 This scene, with Amanda positioned next to the photo of her estranged husband and Laura speaking of her disability, physically evidences the context of the family dynamic. As discussed, Amandas actions are based on what she perceives as the expectations of Mr. Wingfield, and she emphasizes men because of his disappearance. She stands next to his portrait, dictating Lauras life founded not only on her own anticipations, but also those of the absent telephone man. Amanda then forces these ideas onto Laura who, already disheartened by her unattractive disability, feels that she cannot fulfill her mothers expectancies. Amandas persistence becomes extremely detrimental, as Lauras lack of self-esteem causes her to retreat into herself. As a consequence of her perceived failure in reality, Laura uses her prized glass menagerie as a place to escape. Laura is like a piece of her own glass collection, too exquisitely fragile to move from the shelf.18 This emphasized delicacy has, despite her mothers persistence, prevented Laura from ever having a gentleman caller. Laura does not fulfill the societal expectations of a female, as her disability negates any apparent sexual attractiveness and she lacks domestic skills. She does not see herself as someone who can embody the physical characteristics that her mother and, by extension, society expect from a young woman looking for a husband. An absence of self-confidence causes Laura to elevate attention from any male to

16 17

Williams, The Glass Menagerie, 157. Ibid. 18 Williams, The Glass Menagerie, 129.

Bennett 11 an undeserving lofty status. This explains her initial infatuation with Jim OConnor, a high school hero whose own dream of success seems to have reached its peak19 before graduation. Jim used to speak with Laura when they attended school together and she fondly remembers that he called her Blue Roses. Despite their seemingly minimal interaction and his absence in her life for the last six years, Laura cites Jim as the only boy she has ever liked. While the high school hero that Laura originally fell in love with appears to have had a strong character, Jim hasnt progressed much since graduation. Now, he is in a dead-end job at a shipping warehouse with intentions of improving himself by taking classes in public speaking. Jim does not place much importance on brains and ability, but rather suggests that the key to success is being able to square up to people and hold your own on any social level!20 The importance of society and his existence as an underachiever indicate that Jim is a flawed male character. He consumes the idea that social standing will allow him to progress without much other determination. This is a result of his manhood, as it is far easier for him to advance socially than it would be for a woman, even if he doesnt necessarily have the proper intelligence or talent. While dependence on his manhood for social mobility is not necessarily deplorable, Jim does exhibit signs of manipulative sexuality. Despite his steady relationship with another woman, Jim kisses Laura before leaving. The act in itself, while a betrayal of his commitment, would under normal circumstances not cause as big of an issue than what actually results. Based on Lauras presentation as a weak female character, however, the kiss is devastating. Jim does not realize the consequences of his actions in conjunction with Lauras inherent inferiority complex and, ultimately, he leaves Laura with even less confidence than she had. For an instant,
19 20

Stein, The Glass Menagerie Revisited, 38. Williams, The Glass Menagerie, 199.

Bennett 12 Laura believed that she fulfilled the societal expectations of womanhood that Amanda had forced upon her. Jims moment of weakness and exercise of his perceived male sexual privilege cause Laura to realize that she has failed yet again in filling the assigned female gender role. Once Jim leaves, Laura comes to an understanding about herself and retreats entirely into the world of her glass menagerie. The quasi-relationship effectively strips Laura of what little identity she had before Jims reappearance. Though Jim had only been showing her kindness, the gender dynamic between them causes Laura to deem herself a failure in his retreat, and therefore allows him to take her identity when he leaves. Laura effectively permits a man to define her existence. As soon as she realizes she and Jim can never be together, the stage directions suggest, the holy candles on the altar of Lauras face have been snuffed out. There is a look of almost infinite desolation.21 Despite his unflattering characteristics, Laura had hoped that Jim would be able to save her from what she defines as her inadequacies. By depending on him alone, his departure leaves Laura with nothing. At the conclusion of this event, Laura withdraws into herself, unable to make a better life. According to Allan Lewis in American Plays and Playwrights of the Contemporary Theatre, Laura becomes a victim of misplaced love [and] is brokenand resigned to continued rejection.22 Lauras fate serves as a critique of her unconditional love of a male figure. Instead of choosing to move on and reimagine herself, Laura gives up entirely when Jim is incapable of loving her. Though not explicitly stated, this appears to be Lauras last attempt at improving her life. The absurdity of this situation suggests an inherent problem with women constructing their identities based on men.

21

Williams, The Glass Menagerie, 230. Allan Lewis, American Plays and Playwrights of the Contemporary Theatre, (New York: Crown Publishers, Inc., 1970), 62.
22

Bennett 13 Ultimately, Lauras loss of self evidences a failure of the social systems emphasis on gender roles. Because of her disabilitys stark contrast to the expectations of female sexuality, Laura believes herself to be of no worth. If the dynamic had constructed different ideals, it is likely that Laura would not have placed her entire value in whether or not a man loves her. Even further, she may not have had to grow up with a mother who believed in these ideals so wholeheartedly that she, too, thought there were no alternatives but to fulfill these expectations. It is in this dynamic that the true failure exists, as an emphasis on details other than sexuality and domesticity could have led Laura to a happier fate. The critique of this flawed gender dynamic in The Glass Menagerie is strengthened through the symbol of the unicorn. Lauras favorite piece of glass is this unicorn, whose single horn makes it uniquely different from the other horses. The unicorn effectively exists as a metaphor for Laura because it is not like most animals of the modern world and has a single flawthe unicorns horn becomes analogous with Lauras crippled leg. These so-called defects are actually characteristics that make Laura and the unicorn special, but are given a negative connotation because they are outside the norm. However, this paralleled uniqueness does imply that Laura has an identity, albeit a weak one, before Jim comes to call. Jim breaks the horn off the unicorn, making it just like all the other horses.23 This moment symbolizes Jim breaking the rareness of Lauras self. To extend the impact of Jims influence over the relinquishment of Lauras identity, she gives him the broken unicorn to take as a souvenir.24 The destroying of the horn and the giving away of the unicorn serve as a metaphor for Jim both making Laura like her broken unicorn25 and taking her identity. In her desire to love

23 24

Williams, The Glass Menagerie, 226. Williams, The Glass Menagerie, 231. 25 Lewis, American Plays and Playwrights, 62.

Bennett 14 Jim unconditionally in the hopes of salvation from her perceived flaws, Laura renounces her individuality , or her horn, thereby making herself ordinary. The symbolism comments on an unconditional type of love that causes one person to surrender all of herself to another. Rather than having a balance that permits both members to give and take, the social structure of masculinity and femininity dictates that a woman should relinquish herself to a man. This is highly problematic, for as soon as Jim departs, he takes all of Laura with him, leaving her completely void of an identity. Instead of this all-consuming relationship, the symbol of the unicorn suggests that love should allow both people to retain their own unique identities. Commentary on this sort of all-consuming love between a weak female character and a flawed male figure also exists in Suddenly Last Summer. The relationship between Catherine and her cousin Sebastian proved to be highly problematic for her identity. Catherine subsists as an example of Women who struggle to make relationships with men who are unable or unwilling to make lasting relationships.26 Sebastian fits within this definition of men. Throughout his life, Sebastian was a would-be poet and sexual misfit [who] was pampered, overprotected, and dominated by his mother.27 There are several references to Sebastians ingesting of little white pills,28 indicating that he may have been a drug user. Likewise, he was manipulative and would exploit both his mother and Catherine to attract male suitors. Catherine cites an example of Sebastians insistence that she wear a transparent white bathing suit to draw attention and claims I was PROCURING for him!29 Sebastian essentially used his female companions to lure his own male sexual partners. The problem with Sebastian was not [that] he
26 27

Blackwell, Tennessee Williams, 12 Blackwell, Tennessee Williams, 13 28 Tennessee Williams, Suddenly Last Summer, Tennessee Williams: Plays 1957-1980, eds. Mel Gussow & Kenneth Holdich, (New York: Literary Classics of the United States, Inc., 2000), 142-143. 29 Williams, Suddenly Last Summer, 140.

Bennett 15 [was] a homosexual, but [that] he [was] a selfish exploiter.30 Regardless of his preference for men, Sebastian still exhibited many of qualities that society expects of males, such as domination and sexual prowess. These perpetuate his downfall, however, because Sebastians exploitation of everyone around him led to his literal devouring by his victims. Despite his inefficiencies as a strong moral character, Catherines defense of the truth about Sebastians fate has caused her to be institutionalized and she now faces a lobotomy. Louise Blackwell suggests, the unique thing about Catherine is that she yearned for a sexual relationship with a man, her cousin, whom she knew to be weak and strangely perverted.31 Now that Sebastian has died, Catherines entire life is devoted to telling his story and she no longer has an identity of her own. Catherine is constructed as a weak female character because of her inability to overcome the truth about the man she loved. She has lost herself to such an extent that her family members are considering removing part of her brain so she will cease telling the story. Catherines veneration of Sebastian fashioned him into her savior. This is evidenced through her story of the Mardi Gras ball that occurred the winter before the two went abroad. When Catherine decided to leave because her date was too drunk to take care of her, she did not call a taxi but instead allowed a stranger to drive her home. Ultimately, it is implied that she and the stranger had an affair in a field. When he dropped her off, the stranger decided that the incident would best be forgotten, as his wife was expecting their first child. 32 After this episode, Catherine went back to the ball and ran up to [the man] and beat him as hard as [she] could in

30

Michael Paller, Gentlemen Callers : Tennessee Williams, Homosexuality, and Mid-TwentiethCentury Drama, (Gordonsville, VA: Palgrave Macmillan, 2005), 149. 31 Blackwell, Tennessee Williams, 13 32 Williams, Suddenly Last Summer, 132.

Bennett 16 the face and chest with [her] fists tillCousin Sebastian took [her] away.33 That next morning, Catherine underwent a quasi-psychic split and began writing her diary in the third person. The entries also indicate a deep depression, as one states, Shes still living this morningWHATS NEXT FOR HER? GOD KNOWS!34 This statement implies that Catherine had been having some serious issues with her sanity before the Mardi Gras event. The affair and consequent mental breakdown evidence that Catherine was not only highly unstable, but also placed great emphasis on a man for determining her self-worth. After the Mardi Gras fiasco, Catherine began to greatly depend on Sebastian. She tells Dr. Cukrowicz he liked me, so I loved him.35 Sebastian, however, would not accept Catherines love in a romantic capacity. Rather, she had to care for him the only way hed accept: a sort of motherly way.36 Despite this not being the relationship that she desired, Catherine affords Sebastian a saint-like status. This is referenced in the physical location of La Playa San Sebastian, translated to English as the beach of Saint Sebastian. Catherine and Sebastian began to go to San Sebastian every day, and it is at this dirty public beach37 that he used her to attract other men. The contrast between the name of the location and Sebastians actions indicate his unworthiness of Catherines reverence. And yet, Catherine clung to Sebastian, making the mistake of responding too much to his kindness, of taking his hand before hed take hold of [hers], of holding onto his arm and leaning on his shoulder, of appreciating his kindness more than he wanted [her] to38 Catherine explicitly references that

33 34

Ibid. Ibid. 35 Williams, Suddenly Last Summer, 131. 36 Ibid. 37 Williams, Suddenly Last Summer, 139. 38 Williams, Suddenly Last Summer, 137.

Bennett 17 she elevated Sebastian to a status in her life that he did not desire, but he was affectionate with [her]39 and so she continued to allow him to use her for his own manipulative devices. Catherines emphasis on Sebastian once again criticizes the loss of the female identity because of a flawed male figure. Though Catherines inability to move on may no longer be a consequence of her love for Sebastian, this love is the reason she has been put into such a predicament in the first place. Had she not agreed to travel with him in hopes of beginning a sexual relationship, it is likely that Catherine may still have some semblance of her past self. To further this criticism, Sebastians representation of a male character is particularly deplorable and monstrous. His manipulative and pedophilic characteristics make Sebastian highly undeserving of any thought from Catherine, and yet, she has given up all of herself because she discovered the truth of his personality. The venerated status that Catherine affords Sebastian is particularly problematic, especially because she expects, based on the societal norms, that he will be able to save her. This critiques the damsel in distress notion that gender stereotyping creates. Rather, society should begin to perpetuate the idea that women can be their own heroes without the help of a male figure. This criticism is strengthened through two symbols. The play opens with the image of a Venus flytrap that resides in Sebastians garden. It quickly becomes clear that the flytrap exists not only as a symbol for Sebastian himself, but also for this blind, unconditional love that destroys its participators. Venus is the goddess of love in Roman mythology, thereby indicating that there is far more to the inclusion of this plant than just as a prop. Rather, the symbol suggests that Sebastian and all of society [are] like a Venus flytrap; humans, individually and in

39

Ibid.

Bennett 18 groups, devour their own.40 This suggestion is strengthened by the fact that Sebastian is physically devoured by those he had once called lovers. The inclusion of the Venus flytrap indicates that the type of devotion that Catherine would have been willing to give to Sebastian literally consumed her. It ate away at her identity until it simply did not exist. The idea of this all-consuming love is also addressed by the metaphorical story of the sea turtles that Sebastians mother, Mrs. Venable, tells. She recounts one of her travels with Sebastian, saying: We saw the great sea-turtles crawl up out of the sea for their annual egg-layingOnce a year the female of the sea-turtle crawls up out of the equatorial sea pit in the sand and deposits her eggs there. Its a long and dreadful thing[and the] exhausted female turtle crawls back to the sea half deadSebastian knew exactly when the sea-turtle eggs would be hatched out and we returned in time for itThe narrow beach, the color of caviar, was all in motion! But the sky was in motion, tooFull of flesh-eating birdsover the narrow black beach of the Encantadas as the just hatched sea-turtles scrambled out of the sand-pits and started their race to the seato escape the flesh-eating birds that made the sky almost as black as the beach!41 This story is yet another reference to the imposing consumption evident throughout the text. Sebastians connection to these sea turtles parallels his ingestion of human beings with the carnivorous birds. Mrs. Venables detailing of this story, as well as the poignant image of the Venus flytrap, indicates the powerful nature of consumption. These symbols indicate that human beings have a tendency to take pieces of each other until there is nothing left to give. Sebastian was certainly a consumer, from his sexual devouring of other people to the eradication of his
40 41

Paller, Gentlemen Callers, 150. Williams, Suddenly Last Summer, 105.

Bennett 19 cousins identity. It becomes clear that he was an unworthy man, too focused on his manipulation to actually care for Catherine. Based on her construction as a weak female character, she did not have a means of escaping his overwhelming personality. Rather, the dynamic between them caused Catherine and her identity to be consumed whole by Sebastian. This serves as a critique for the greater social dynamic that allows many females to be devoured in this same way by flawed males. Tennessee Williams again addresses this unhealthy type of love in The Eccentricities of a Nightingale. This play is a rewrite of what he suggests is the substantially different play Summer and Smoke. Though this version had never been performed on Broadway, Williams preferred it because it is less conventional and melodramatic,42 which is why it will be discussed here. Once again, the main plight of these characters is the unconditional yet unrequited love between a weak female character and a flawed male figure. This male figure, John Buchanan, is presented as a womanizer whose actions are dictated by the opinions of his mother. It is suggested that Mrs. Buchanan stands guard over him like an old dragonterrified that someone will snatch him from her.43 Despite being particularly engaged with his mother, John exhibits one of the stereotypical characteristics of manhood in his emphasis on sex. John proves to have had many sexual experiences with women as demonstrated by, when asked if he could find his way to the honky-tonk in town, he replies, I could find it blindfolded.44 He is constructed as a man who is emotionally unavailable and unlikely to be able to love a woman who is not his mother. This is evidenced by David Savran in his statement that John is a (hetero)sexually

42

Tennessee Williams, The Eccentricities of a Nightingale, Tennessee Williams: Plays 19571980, eds. Mel Gussow & Kenneth Holdich, (New York: Literary Classics of the United States, Inc., 2000), 432. 43 Williams, Eccentricities, 434. 44 Williams, Eccentricities, 478.

Bennett 20 vital young [man] who epitomize[s]the virility that will rejuvenate, the force that can suddenly and almost magically awaken sexual desire and transform a womanfrom a state of real or feigned innocence to a wary yet vigorous adulthood.45 John personifies many of the stereotypical characteristics of a male to an extreme, causing him to lack a strong moral core. Despite these insufficiencies, Alma has been in love with John since they were children. However, she is constructed as a weak female character because she lacks the stereotypical expectations of a woman, such as inherent sexuality, that would compliment Johns qualities. Alma is defined as an eccentric because she is prematurely spinsterish and prone to nervous attacks.46 In fact, there is an implication throughout the text that Alma may be addicted to her anxiety medication. Several times, she must take a tablet to ease her worries. This is demonstrated when Alma has an attack and goes to Johns father, a doctor, for stronger medication. Based on her perceived inefficiencies, Alma is not the ideal woman for John. Alma addresses these concerns when she muses, And when you marry, youll marry some Northern beauty. She will have no eccentricities but the eccentricity of beauty and perfect calm. 47 She directly acknowledges that the qualities she possesses will not serve Johns needs, but instead of moving on, Alma longs for him and allows him to take advantage of her. Almas ideas about love and marriage, much like Lauras, have been heavily influenced by her mother. Wherein Amanda forced the stereotypical ideals of feminism onto Laura, Almas problems originate with her mothers mental absence. Instead of being too influenced by a

45

David Savran, Communists, Cowboys, and Queers: The Politics of Masculinity in the Work of Arthur Miller and Tennessee Williams, (Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota Press, 1992), 122. 46 Jacqueline OConnor, Dramatizing Dementia: Madness in the Plays of Tennessee Williams, (Bowling Green, OH: Bowling Green State University Popular Press, 1997), 14. 47 Williams, Eccentricities, 470.

Bennett 21 woman who has consumed the ideals of a female stereotype in high society, Alma has not learned them at all. Rather, her construction as a weak character seems to have been passed on from mother to daughter. It is suggested that many of Almas eccentricities are hereditary.48 When Alma berates John for rejecting her for someone more stable, she cries, The bride will have beauty, beauty! Admirable family background, no lunacy in it, no skeletons in the closet49 This suggests that Almas inability to fulfill the expected norms of the female identity largely derives from the failure of her mother to do so as well. Rather, they are both deemed eccentrics, placing them outside of the paradigm that would allow them functional relationships with men. Mrs. Winemillers own peculiarities also create an inherent difficulty within her marriage to Reverend Winemiller that ultimately warps Almas ideas about relationships. Almas father believes that his wife chose her mentally unstable condition after they wed. Reverend Winemiller claims, Your mother has chosen to be the way she is. She isnt out of her mind. Its all deliberate. One week after our marriage a look came into her eyesa cold and secretly spiteful look as if I, who loved her, who was devoted to her had done her some, someinjury!50 Reverend Winemiller suggests that these women, the ones that choose to change their mental capacities to those of a problematic nature, are the type that should not marry but do. It is in this instance that Alma suggests she and her mother share eccentricities, but their differences still not work in Almas favor. Alma responds to her fathers statement about women like her mother, I know, but they do, they do! They are the ones that marry! The ones that could bring to marriage the sort of almosttranscendental! Tenderness that it calls forwhat do they do? Teach

48 49 50

OConnor, Dramatizing Dementia, 14. Williams, Eccentricities, 471. Williams, Eccentricities, 435.

Bennett 22 school! Teach Singing! Make a life out of little accomplishments!51 Alma does not align herself as the same type of woman as her mother in this capacity, which effectively constructs her as the type of woman that would do well as a wife, but will never married. Therefore, not only does she believe her oddities to be genetic, she also has not inherited the characteristics she thinks are essential for marital bliss. This sets Alma up for a unique sort of disaster, as she therefore begins her relationships believing that they will not end in marriage. Rather, Alma instead approaches each interaction with the supposition that she will be used for other devices, such as sex, and that is her only worth to a man. As consequence, the main conflict between Alma and John occurs as a one-night stand. John recognizes that Alma is lonesome and capitalizes. When Alma asks him to take her to a room, he obliges, saying that he doesnt love her. In her weakness, Alma responds that an hour of romance will be enough. As Alice Griffin suggests, At first, their room is cold, their efforts to light a fire seem to fail, and they decide to leave. Then the fire springs to life, and John is about to kiss her when the scene ends; we assume they make love.52 The progression of this scene suggests that their contact is forced and should not occur, and yet, it happens anyway. Alma completely relinquishes her identity to John through this interaction. He is unworthy of her love because of his characteristics but she does not care and spends the night with him. The contact between Alma and John provides a critique on this unrequited love. John is not capable of caring about Alma the way she needs or deserves to be loved. However, because Alma is constructed as such a weak character that is the sum of what society has deemed eccentricities, she dismisses his faults and allows an hour in a hotel room to be enough for her.

51 52

Williams, Eccentricities, 435-436. Alice Griffin, Understanding Tennessee Williams, ed. Matthew J. Burccoli, (South Carolina: University of South Carolina Press, 1995), 102.

Bennett 23 After this incident, it becomes clear that Almas warped sense of romance has pervaded her life. When a traveling salesman comes to town, Alma implicitly offers him the same sort of relationship that she sustained with John. In a conversation with the salesman, she points him to Tiger Town, the location of the honky-tonk where she and John had their affair. The salesman asks what Tiger Town has to offer and Alma responds Saloons, penny arcades, and rooms that can be rented for one hour, which is a short space of time for human beings53 It is suggested that Alma will spend an hour with this man in the same capacity as she had shared with John. Alma has lost any indication of what a good and true relationship with a man should be and instead loses her own identity in favor of becoming a sexual object, as that is what she feels is her only chance at being close to a man. Almas last line in the play emphasizes the pervasive nature of losing someone or something. After the traveling salesman tells Alma to be careful not to lose him on the way to Tiger Town, she responds, Im not going to lose you before Ive lost you!54 Based on her failed relationship with John, this statement suggests that she will not physically lose the salesman until she has already lost him emotionally. She believes that he, too, will use her in the way that John did and they will not have an emotional relationship, despite their physical connection. Rather, Alma will cling to the salesman regardless of whether he is physically present, just as she has done with John. Alma has completely lost herself by the end of the play, suggesting that her relationship with John has eradicated what little identity she had in the first place. This criticizes the sort of romantic relationship between a weak female and an unworthy male, wherein the woman gives up all of herself when she cannot fulfill the expectations he has for her.
53 54

Williams, Eccentricities, 486. Williams, Eccentricities, 487

Bennett 24 The relationship between Alma and these men can be further analyzed through a translation of her name. Almas is Spanish for soul.55 The connections she makes with these men, however, are those belonging to the realm of the body. One of the larger reasons that relationships do not work for Alma is because her spiritual nature does not coincide well with the physical expectations of the males. This mind/body dualism56 exists as further delineation between males and females. It is more common for society to expect females to pay particular attention to feelings and emotions, or those features typically associated with the soul. The emphasis on sex and domination, then, aligns masculinity with the corporeal. Almas dependency on males causes her to give up the emotional aspect of love in favor of participating in the physical presentation. This is a critique of the structure that separates feelings and physicality into prescribed gender stereotypes. Rather than just emphasizing only physicality or emotion, the dualism should be forgotten in favor of a type of love that sustains both. For Alma, the overpowering physicality criticizes the system where a males preference eradicates any necessity for a females emotive love. Furthermore, the burden of the type of love prevalent throughout this text is highlighted by the metaphor of the cross. On several occasions, multiple characters reference the cross that each person must bear. In regards to this metaphor, Alma states, The only thing to do with a cross is bear it.57 Within the context of Alma and Johns relationship, the love that Alma has for him is a cross that she must suffer. She cannot escape from their relationship because she has lost all of herself, so instead of abandoning the burden, she continues to carry it instead. This

OConnor, Dramatizing Dementia, 14. Brenda A. Murphy, Tennessee Williams, A Companion to Twentieth Century American Drama, ed. David Krasner, (Malden, Massachusetts: Blackwell Publishing, Ltd., 2005), 181. 57 Williams, Eccentricities, 435.
55 56

Bennett 25 comments on the problematic nature of the unhealthy love dictated by gender norms. By extension, the expectations of the social world may also be considered a cross. The stereotypical anticipations become extremely cumbersome for people who cannot fulfill them. However, because the norms are not flexible, they must simply be carried as well. The stereotyped standards and relationships that evolve from them become obligations that cannot be left behind. Therefore, they are analogous with the other burdens that a person must carry in life. It is through the construction of these male-female relationships and the supporting symbols that the true problem of an emphasis on societal gender roles is revealed. Tennessee Williams creates female characters that have severe issues that worsen through unrequited romantic feelings for flawed males. Of course, the imperfections of these males may not always be particularly deplorable, but it is in the consequences of the failed relationships that the true problems arise. The extent to which females are destroyed by these interactions criticizes the social structure that places them in a position of inferiority. When a woman is raised to believe her self worth derives from pleasing a man, she has very little foundation on which to base a solid personality. Instead, each failed encounter with a male deteriorates part of her identity until it is completely gone. Even further, a woman who has lost her identity in this way goes on to teach her daughters the same idealsit is through man that a woman can truly find herself. The absurdity of the situations presented in Williamss texts condemns the idea that a womans life begins with man, and she should spend the entirety of it pleasing him. Failure of women to retain a sense of self after a disastrous male encounter faults the entire system on which the foundation of these relationships is built. It is only through analyzing and acknowledging the shortcomings of a society that creates such problematic gender roles that any kind of progress can be made to eliminate the custom of sexual stereotyping.

Bennett 26 Bibliography Blackwell, Louise. 1970. Tennessee Williams and the Predicament of Women, South Atlantic Bulletin, 32, no. 2: 9-14, http://www.jstor.org/stable/3197002 Blasius, Mark. 2001. Sexual Identities: Queer Politics. Princeton, New Jersey: Princeton University Press. Bloom, Harold. 2007. Tennessee Williamss The Glass Menagerie. New York: Infobase Publishing. Brigsby, C.W.E. 1984. A Critical Introduction to Twentieth-Century American Drama, Volume 2: Williams, Miller, Albee. New York: Cambridge University Press. ------ 1992. Modern American Drama, 1945-1990. New York: Cambridge University Press. Chambliss, William J. and Eglitis, Diana S. 2014. Discover Sociology. Thousand Oaks, California: SAGE Publications, Inc. Fryer, David Ross. 2012. Thinking Queerly: Race, Sex, Gender, and the Ethics of Identity. Boulder, Colorado: Paradigm Publishers. Gilbert, Paula Ruth. 2002. Discourses of Female Violence and Societal Gender Stereotypes, Violence Against Women 8, no. 1271. doi: 10.1177/107780102762478019 Griffin, Alice. 1995. Understanding Tennessee Williams, Edited by Matthew J. Burccoli. South Carolina: University of South Carolina Press. Jackson, Esther Merle. 1966. The Broken World of Tennessee Williams. Madison, Wisconsin: The University of Wisconsin Press. Lewis, Allan. 1970. American Plays and Playwrights of the Contemporary Theatre. New York: Crown Publishers, Inc. Murphy, Brenda A. 2005. Tennessee Williams, A Companion to Twentieth Century American Drama. Edited by David Krasner, 175-191. Malden, Massachusetts: Blackwell Publishing, Ltd. OConnor, Jacqueline. 1997. Dramatizing Dementia: Madness in the Plays of Tennessee Williams. Bowling Green, OH: Bowling Green State University Popular Press. Paller, Michael. 2005. Gentlemen Callers : Tennessee Williams, Homosexuality, and MidTwentieth-Century Drama. Gordonsville, VA: Palgrave Macmillan.

Bennett 27 Parker, R. B. 1983. Twentieth Century Interpretations of The Glass Menagerie. Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice-Hall, Inc. Roudan, Matthew C. 1997. The Cambridge Companion to Tennessee Williams. Cambridge, United Kingdom: Cambridge University Press. Savran, David. 1992. Communists, Cowboys, and Queers: The Politics of Masculinity in the Work of Arthur Miller and Tennessee Williams. Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota Press. Schwartz, Adria E. 1998. Sexual Subjects: Lesbians, Gender, and Psychoanalysis. New York: Routledge. Sinfield, Alan. 2004. Sexuality and Power. New York: Columbia University Press. Stein, Roger B. 1977. The Glass Menagerie Revisited: Catastrophe without Violence, Tennessee Williams: A Collection of Critical Essays, ed. Stephen S. Stanton, 36-44. Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice-Hall, Inc. Sullivan, Nikki. 2003. A Critical Introduction to Queer Theory. New York: Edinburgh University Press, Ltd. Williams, Tennessee. 1971. The Catastrophe of Success, in The Theatre of Tennessee Williams, Volume 1. New York: New Directions Publishing Corporation. ------ 1971. The Glass Menagerie, in The Theatre of Tennessee Williams, Volume 1. New York: New Directions Publishing Corporation. ------ 2000. The Eccentricities of a Nightingale, Tennessee Williams: Plays 1957-1980, Edited by Mel Gussow and Kenneth Holdich. New York: Literary Classics of the United States, Inc. ------ 2000. Suddenly Last Summer, Tennessee Williams: Plays 1957-1980 Edited by Mel Gussow and Kenneth Holdich. New York: Literary Classics of the United States, Inc.