Reading Quiz 4/10

https://docs.google.com/forms/d/1jJp40ShF4chw60UB2RNULihpwJp7B_w5lGueLnGcblE/viewform

The Glass Menagerie | Blog Post #5

The most interesting aspect of “The Glass Menagerie” is the way it is presented to the audience.  Tennessee Williams opens with a lot of stage directions, including:

“The scene is memory and is therefore non-realistic. Memory takes a lot of poetic license. It omits some details; others are exaggerated, according to the emotional value of the articles it touches, for memory is seated predominantly in the heart. The interior is therefore rather dim and poetic.” (Online text)

The indication that the play is a memory defies what a regular play of the time would do.

Through flashbacks, Williams shows the obligation to family rather than telling a moral and leaves the reader hanging at the ending. Williams, living through the Great Depression, depicts life as it was rather than how things should be done and since he narrates, we get no closure with Laura or Amanda.

From the very being inning of the play, there is a tension between Tom and his mother. The strain on their relationship is in part due to Tom being the provider during the Great Depression (although Amanda does sell occasionally). To get away with this harsh reality, Tom often goes to the movies where he seeks excitement in his monotonous life. In scene 6 when talking to Jim, Tom states:

“TOM: People go to the movies instead of moving! Hollywood characters are supposed to have all the adventures for everybody in America, while everybody in America sits in a dark room and watches them have them! Yes, until there's a war. That's when adventure becomes available to the masses... But I'm not patient. I don't want to wait till then. I'm tired of the movies and I am about to move!”

This illustrates how life was for ‘the masses’. Ordinary people had no chance of adventure because they were making ends meet. Through constantly going back and forth and referring to the movies, Tom illustrates how miserable life was, which was a stark contrast to previous plays.

For example, in “A Doll’s House”, Nora stands up for herself and there is a moral to the story; there is a take away. In this play, there is no take away. It provides an insight rather a theme.

Further, Tom’s monologue at the end states that he left his family.

“TOM: Oh, Laura, Laura, I tried to leave you behind me, but I am more faithful than I intended to be! I reach for a cigarette, I cross the street, I run into the movies or a bar, I buy a drink, I speak to the nearest stranger -anything that can blow your candles out… and so goodbye.”

Because this is all of Tom’s memory, we get no closure with the other character and we don’t know what became of Laura or Amanda. There are many unanswered questions, which is peculiar because it is a full length play, compared to “Endgame”

I think Williams did this to form a new style. In this, we only know what Tom remembers. We don’t know what truly happens. I think he did this because it’s similar to how people recount a story. I also think he did this to make the reader think about the ending. We feel for Laura, but we don’t know what will come of her, similar to how things are in real life.

I think it’s frustrating, in a good way. When reading a novel, readers want to know every last detail. However, with this, it is like you really knew Laura and you drifted apart and you don’t know how her life turned out. It’s true. In that respect, I do believe Williams achieved his goal, for I can only think about what happens to Laura and Amanda.

Blog Post #5 The Glass Menagerie

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.

Blog post #5 - The Glass Menagerie

Williams’ play The Glass Menagerie defies what we, the audience, believe to be modern play characteristics. He does this in a few key ways: the use of a screen during the play, the narration of the play by a main character, and by making the play a memory.

In the original writing of the play, Tennessee Williams had planned for a screen to be placed on stage with images projected onto it. These images would emphasize significance of an object or event or even foreshadow a coming event. For example, in the first scene, lines 76-85 Amanda is telling Tom how she had seventeen gentleman callers back in the day. According to stage direction the screen produces an image of Amanda greeting callers on a porch. In this part of the play the screen serves as a medium to show a flashback, even though the play in itself is a memory. In a separate part of the play the screen is used to emphasize key words in the play, such as in scene two when the screen shows an image of blue roses, the nickname Jim had given Laura in school.

Another characteristic of the play that is not typical to what we believe a modern play to be is the narration of the play by one of the leading characters, Tom. While narration of a play is common, Tennessee Williams decides to use Tom as both a narrator and main character in the play. In the opening scene the audience learns the background of the play through Tom’s narration. Tom then proceeds to enter into the play as a regular character and acts just as if he has been in the play the whole time. Contrary to the idea that the narrator should be of a third party and not in the play, Tennessee Williams decides to have Tom narrate as the play is of Tom’s own memory.

Tom’s narration allows for Williams to once again defy our understanding of a modern play by making the play that of a memory. We learn of this in scene one line 16 as Tom states “The play is a memory” to the audience. While plays that include flashbacks may be common, it is unusual that this play was created as a recollection subject to character Tom who experienced the actions firsthand in the future. The fact that the play is a memory also contributes to the abrupt ending we see in the play as Tom’s memory has ended.   

Blog Post 5

    While Tennesee Williams' play may seem like a normal late 19th century play as you begin to read it, it definitely ends up surprising the reader. Generally speaking, you expect a play to have an introduction, rising action, a climax, falling action, and an ending. The Glass Menagerie however doesn't fit that mold. The play seems to be written in a very bland, monotonous tone that contains no excitement. The main surprise related to the plot and overall setup of the play is the ending, because there basically isn't one. Well, there isn't a significant one anyway; it leaves you hanging and questioning what exactly has happened.

     Williams' play opens up with a pretty normal introduction that provides a solid background and introduces the characters that the reader will focus on throughout the play. Many small events happen during the play, like Tom arguing with his mother, Tom always leaving the house, Tom inviting one of his coworkers over for dinner, Jim kissing Laura, Laura's favorite animal breaking, etc. The problem is that none of these events have much of a significance and therefore don't really bring much interest to the play. Also, many of the events almost seem strange and unexpected. The most unexpected part of the entire play is the ending.

     The final scene opens with descriptions of dinner, contains Jim and Laura's dancing and kissing, includes Jim's telling of his engagement and why he must rush off, Amanda's confrontation with Tom about him playing a "joke" by inviting Jim over, and then it ends in a completely unexpected way. Tom's final monologue informs the reader of several things: he was fired from his job at the warehouse, he wants to be like his father, he has been traveling in order to accomplish his goal (though he does not inform us of the goal), and he truly misses his sister because he sees so many things while he is gone that somehow remind him of her. Most of these things Tom discusses are being introduced to the reader for the first time. The fact that almost everything he sees reminds him of his sister really stood out to me, because it didn't seem like she meant that much to him in the play. After Tom finishes his monologue, the play simply ends. There's no rebuttal from Amanda (like there usually is when Tom speaks), there's no indication of how Laura feels, and it's just over. Like I said earlier, it's like Tennessee Williams wanted to leave you hanging and waiting for more, although you were never going to get that.

     There is no doubt in my mind as to why Tennessee Williams chose to end this play in the way that he did. He wrote this play as a "memory play" which simply portrayed a memory, through Tom's eyes in this particular case, so it must begin when his memory begins and end when his memory ends. Reading this type of play would not be my preference, because it is like a small "chunk" has been taken out of time and you are never really informed about what went on in the time surrounding the "chunk" that was taken out. I would much rather read a play that had a normal plot structure so there would seem like there was more of a point to the play. However, Williams accomplished his goal of writing The Glass Menagerie as a "memory play" because basically the entire play was told through Tom's eyes and opinion. It is easy for the reader to realize that it is his memory that was important, because his actions seem to take over the majority of the play. The ending also solidifies Williams' efforts in writing this particular type of play, because when his memory is over, the play is over; there is nothing else included to make the play have a normal ending. You can also tell the focus is on Tom, because he is the main character involved with the beginning and ending of the play.

Blog Post #5

Tennessee Williams really did create a new theatrical genre when he created memory plays. In a previous drama class, one of the biggest aspects of theatre was the common, agreed-upon notion that the everything is unfolding before the audience's eyes for the first time. It is clear that this is not the case in The Glass Menagerie because we know Tom is recollecting memories. While we, the audience, are all experiencing these events for the first time, Tom's prologue breaks the 4th wall and informs the audience that this is not occurring in real time. While it is not uncommon for characters to break the 4th wall, it is interesting that the character breaks the 4th wall in order to become the narrator. Tom tells us that we will experience an illusion in which we think these events are unfolding in real time.

Williams defines memory plays as being selective since the the past is being retold from a primary source. Thus, objectivity has been removed from the story and our interpretation of the events that occurred can be really misconstrued. This conscious choice by Williams, along with his very specific stage directions, distinct characterizations of the characters and the screens pronouncing the main idea of every scene, pushes readers to believe that Williams had a distinct "point" of the play or a story that he did not misinterpreted.  It is believed that The Glass Menagerie closes resembles a time in Williams' life and that the character Tom represents Williams. Williams' provides a sample story of how the Great Depression affected families and influenced their values. He wants the audience to pity the situation that Tom is in: the Great Depression has trapped Tom in the unfulfilling lives of both Amanda and Laura, crippling his dreams and ambitions and forcing him to seek refuge elsewhere. The theme Williams is trying to personify is that desperate times cause of desperate measures. Similar to Amanda trying to downplay Laura's disability and make it irrelevant, Williams sister had medical illness that convinced their mother seek controversial treatment. Also, like Tom, Williams worked in a factory in order to help out his family; college did not work out well for him so his father put him to work. Relating this to Laura, once Amanda knows Laura has dis-enrolled from school, Amanda puts all her eggs in the marriage basket for Laura. 

I think Williams achieves his goal of trying to bring the audience closer to the truth and reality he is trying to exhibit with the memory play. Williams creates an unrealistic setting for the audience to try and forge a truth and reality from. The lighting, music, screens, and narration create an active engagement with the audience that accurately demonstrates lives of the Great Depression. 

Blog Post # 5 - The Glass Menagerie

Tennessee Williams, author of The Glass Menagerie and many other important dramatic works, defies the audiences’ expectations with the aforementioned masterpiece. A conventional play (or what Williams refers to as, a “realistic” play) relies on a sort of photorealistic setting, populated with believable and true-to-life characters and a, well, conventional approach to chronology. Williams however, employs things such as an unconventional timeline by making The Glass Menagerie a “memory play,” unusual lighting, and musical underscores to totally break the comfortable and long-accepted mold. In doing so, he questions just how true to reality these conventional dramatic works were and are, and attempts to create an alternative way in which to present plays so as to make them even closer to reality.

Williams himself says that, because The Glass Menagerie is a “memory play,” it should not and does not stray away from its “responsibility of dealing with reality,” but that it instead “should be attempting to find a closer approach, a more penetrating and vivid expression of things as they are.” I feel that he succeeded in doing so with The Glass Menagerie, despite its off-putting challenges to theatrical norms mentioned above. In fact, it is because of these challenges that this success is possible. Take the very nature of the play for example - what does Williams mean by “memory play”? The narrator, Tom, explains this to the audience in the first monologue of the show:

TOM: The play is memory. Being a memory play, it is dimly lighted, it is sentimental, it is not realistic. In memory everything seems to happen to music. That explains the fiddle in the wings.

I am the narrator in the play, and also a character in it.

This may seem to challenge what was previously asserted by his claiming that “it is not realistic,” but that he breaks the fourth wall and levels with the audience has the opposite effect. Now we know (as if we didn’t before) that it’s just a play, that it’s just a memory, but Tom does not say that he is but an actor. What he has set up now, particularly in the latter portion of his monologue by referring to himself as a poet with a “weakness for symbols,” is that he is very real. From this point onward, the play can be read (or viewed) as a conversation between Tom and the audience - a conversation one might have at a bar with a stranger after asking why they’re there and receive an answer which neither were expecting. The setting and timeline choices now all appear to be logical and manipulated specifically to make the play seem as a real memory does. That Williams chooses to use dim, unexpected, and unconventional lighting choices to highlight certain characters (for instance, Laura as she sat on the couch in the dinner scene with Jim) only underscores this. In memories, often times the oddest things are what stand out, what appear the most important after the fact. The dim and spotty lighting show the audience exactly how he remembers it, and the music we hear in the background serves to do the same.