The Glass Menagerie, written by Tennessee Williams, makes bold moves to innovate what can be portrayed on the stage. From the screen that intermittently displays images to the theme music that plays on cue, multiple things push the boundaries of the traditional play format. What I want to focus on is Williams' attempt to portray truth through the unrealistic world he creates in the Glass Menagerie. Here Williams utilizes an illusory world to express his thoughts to the audience.
There are multiple reasons Williams uses an imaginary world to represent truth. For one, he gains an inherent flexibility with the environment and characters since the world does not have to be like reality at all. Also, he defies the typical mold of plays attempting to portray reality. Altogether, just like Endgame, the play can be more profound through the utilization of bizarre features (such as the glass menagerie, the screen, the fire escape, Laura's physical deformities etc). Williams' goal is to reach beyond the limitations of realism.
As far as my reaction as a reader, I find the quaint details of the play pop out of the setting in a way that no "lifelike" detail could do itself. I almost feel as if Williams wanted the reader to constantly ask, "Why?" From the start this question puts the reader into an analytic mindset which undoubtedly is the author's objective. For example, the dual character of Tom really got my head spinning since he performs as a character and narrates as an objective viewer. At first I assumed Tom would have a better perspective since the entire play was in his hindsight, but once he started arguing with Amanda over how to chew food, my assumption crumbled. How can one person be totally removed from a situation while also being totally involved? This is an example of a bizarre feature that in a way hypnotizes the reader into a relationship with the play.
The last part of the prompt asks if I personally think that Williams achieved his goal of using an illusion to demonstrate truth in reality. I would answer yes, and the best way to support my view is to a give a good example of truth presented through the imaginary world of the play. Here is my best/favorite example:
The way that a lack of power does not necessarily mean that one has no influence.
This truth is seen in the play through the odd influence Laura has on her brother and mother. Although physically handicapped and mentally stunned, she has a unifying power in the household. This can be seen in the way she peacefully settles quarrels between Amanda and Tom and in the tranquil nature of her character. She also serves as an anchor for Amanda and Tom. For if she were not there, would Tom and Amanda not leave the house to pursue other interests? She, even in her own helplessness, causes the family unit to mesh together despite the lack of a father in the home. She reminds me of the influence of children in real life. They are fragile (like glass and like Laura's frail body) and unable to fend for themselves. Children can serve as an anchor too just like Laura. Often times parents are motivated to go to work and stick together everyday because of the children's profound influence. Then, and I have seen it on multiple occasions, the children become independent and leave for college or for the work force while the house crumbles (or burns) behind them. The parents separate having become different as the years went by and look for the best way to spend their final years. This process in reality attests to the value of Laura in Williams' imaginary world. The weakest characters can have an incredible effect. Dependence has its value, and Independence has its cost.
I rest my case (since this is only one example there are many more). I think that Tennessee Williams did an extraordinarily great job extrapolating truth from illusion.
No comments:
Post a Comment