Wednesday, September 15, 2010

SABBATH'S THEATER

“Either foreswear fucking others or the affair is over.” – first paragraph of Sabbath’s Theater

“And he couldn’t do it. He could not fucking die. How could he leave? How could he go? Everything he hated was here.” – last paragraph of Sabbath’s Theater

In his National Book Award winning novel Sabbath’s Theater Philip Roth gives us a character with very little in the way of redeeming qualities. Roth’s reader cares about Ozzie or Zuckerman or Portnoy without having to be convinced. Sabbath, not so much. When I first bought Sabbath’s Theater, a group of friends had decided that we needed to have a book club where we read awesome new books. All of us were aspiring professional writers, and three out of four of us now teach college-level English, so we were not going to be put off by difficult text or characters. But then the group chose Sabbath. They stopped reading after a hundred pages. I did, also, but only because of peer pressure. Because, to be honest, I absolutely LOVE this book.

The question is, why would I (and the National Book Award committee) love this book? It, like most of Roth’s work, is a character study. And the character is horrid. But the world he sees – Sabbath’s ability to SEE, and to show the reader – that’s amazing. From the center of the novel:

[Sabbath] seated himself heavily on his haunches, pale, perspiring, breathless, while on her own Drenka took over the quest [to achieve thirteen orgasms in a row]. This was like nothing he had ever seen before. He thought, It’s as though she is wrestling with Destiny, or God, or Death; it’s as though, if only she can break through to yet one more, nothing and no one will ever stop her again. She looked to be in some transitional state between woman and goddess – he had the queer feeling of watching someone leaving this world. She was about to ascend, to ascend and ascend, trembling eternally in the ultimate, delirious thrill, but instead something stopped her and a year later she died.

Why does one woman love you madly when she swallows it and another hate your guts if you suggest she even try?

Wow. The sheer emotional intensity and beauty of this vision of Drenka – of “woman” in this powerful moment when she is celebrating life to its fullest. Then the shock of Sabbath’s crudity immediately following it. You want to share Sabbath’s vision – you want in his head – you want to see Drenka’s ascension – but you want to be able to jump out before he drops the next foul bombshell. And you can’t. You have to read every single word in Sabbath’s head. If you don’t, you fear you might miss the best ones.

The first line of the novel is a great example of what Roth does with the character through the entire book: “Either foreswear fucking others or the affair is over.” Here Roth gives us a character who would use the word “foreswear” in an actual sentence. But then to follow it with “fucking”! The way this line unfolds in the mind is nothing short of brilliant. As a single line, the sentence works poetically, unfolding verbal connections which the reader could not see coming. Yet when it becomes a complete line, the reader knows something valuable about the character telling us the tale. Much like Humbert Humbert’s first few lines ending with “You can always count on a murderer for a fancy prose style,” Sabbath’s line here shows the reader how his brain works.

It is telling that in a posting about a whole novel I would choose to focus on only a few lines. The density of the prose – the density of Sabbath’s thoughts – demands such close scrutiny. Zuckerman’s mind is growing, changing; it isn’t so full to bursting. And Portnoy is simply yelling at the top of his lungs – the thoughts are all verbalized for Portnoy, and therefore they take longer to express (as all our verbal thoughts take longer to “say” than the ones in our heads). Sabbath lives inside his own head. The rest of the world is his puppet show. I’m reminded of the line from the film Slingblade: “That Frank, he lives inside of his own heart. That's an awful big place to live in.” Sabbath’s head is a huge place to live, containing the entire universe of human sexuality.

About midway through the novel, Roth presents the reader with a puzzler – in a footnote he includes a transcript of a telephone conversation recorded and then broadcast to the world. Introducing the conversation, Roth says that numerous people would simply stop what they were doing and listen to this conversation for half an hour. And in placing it entire in the novel, Roth only uses half the page for the footnote – the top of the page is still the novel. This goes on for twenty pages. The reader checks out of the novel for twenty pages to read this footnote. And there is nothing in it that hasn’t been explained in the novel, except that the footnote is pure, unadulterated, sex. Porn. Flagrant Penthouse Letters kind of porn. There’s the beauty of Roth’s creation of Sabbath: What kind of person would record this exchange? What kind of person would say the things he says during the conversation? Obviously the perverted kind. This kind of character must be someone desperate to live – desperate to celebrate life through the perversion of his sexuality. But who wants to experience such a life secondhand? The other characters must be just like who? You? The reader? Can’t you just hear Sabbath laughing at you as you flip back twenty pages to find your place again?

After all, didn’t you stop to read all twenty pages of the pornographic exchange?

I know I did.

Friday, September 10, 2010

THE NIGHT OF THE IGUANA

“Personal lyricism is the outcry of prisoner to prisoner from the cell in solitary where each is confined for the duration of his life.” – Tennessee Williams

Like Gwendolyn Brooks’ Negro Hero, Tennessee Williams' characters must define their own morality. Living in existential loneliness, each of Williams’ characters craves the temporary connections which life sometimes gives. Tom in Menagerie and Blanche in Streetcar never manage to make meaningful connects. Brick and Big Daddy and then Maggie seem to manage such moments in Cat on a Hot Tin Roof, but it is Hannah from The Night of the Iguana who perhaps defines the moment best:

HANNAH: No, I’m not hopeless…. In fact, I’ve discovered something to believe in.

SHANNON: Something like… God?

HANNAH: No.

SHANNON: What?

HANNAH: Broken gates between people so they can reach each other, even if it’s just for one night only…. One night… communication between them on a verandah outside their… separate cubicles…. A little understanding exchanged between them, a wanting to help each other through nights like this.

In a play with perhaps less meat to it than the other three Williams’ plays I discuss, he here gives us a character quite as broken as any other, but a character who knows something about the need for human connection. And when there is no longer a god for characters to believe in, what else is left but some human connection?

In Iguana, the viewer is presented with a broken man of faith surrounded by women – some of whom wish him well; some of whom wish him ill. Shannon’s faith has been tested and then lost – that is, his faith in humanity has been lost. However, he’s still trying hard to connect human to human: “I’ve always allowed the ones that were willing to see, to see!... and if they had hearts to be touched, feelings to feel with, I gave them a priceless chance to feel and be touched. And none will ever forget it, none of them, ever, never!” However, Shannon’s impassioned statement is made to a woman without such a heart – a woman who seeks his ruin.

Williams does this – has his characters explain themselves to others who cannot understand – precisely because such moments touch the audience so deeply. We know what it means to not be understood. And Williams knows that we know. Introducing the penguin edition of Cat on a Hot Tin Roof and Other Plays (which contains Iguana), Williams quotes an earlier statement of his regarding the connection between the playwright and the audience: “We come to each other, gradually, but with love…. With love and with honesty, the embrace is inevitable.” Williams believes in an intimate relationship between himself and his audience: “Their being strangers somehow makes them more familiar and more approachable, easier to talk to.” Clearly Williams sees his plays, his characters, as ways of crying out from his personal solitary cell to those other lonely prisoners in his audience trapped in their own cells for life.

With Shannon and Hannah and the rest of Iguana’s crowd, Williams gives his viewer several contradictory moral statements. And even a few amoral or perhaps nearly immoral ones. In the play there is no loving, caring god; there is no clear compass to salvation. Williams makes one moral path clear, however, and that is the statement of Hannah’s above: the only real thing to believe in is broken gates between people. The breaks are temporary – sometimes only for one night – but the connections are real. They are the modern substitution for a belief in some connection to a caring god in a world where such god is missing.

So, Menagerie and Streetcar present the loneliness of characters for whom the gates never seem to break – at least they don’t break for two characters at once like they do for Shannon and Hannah. Iguana gives a bit of hope for the love that can be found in such breaks, in the recognition of the humanity of another. But for me it is Cat on a Hot Tin Roof that shows most powerfully how sublime is Williams personal lyricism as his characters cry out for honesty and love amidst a life of solitary confinement.

Missing few months

Sorry for the missing few months between May and September. I've been reading and reading and reading -- and I'm surrounded by books -- but I haven't been posting. I'm going to begin posting now and work diligently to get these posts up in the next few weeks. Doing the posting will help me remember the characters, plots, theories, and whatnot that make up the material I'll need when I sit for my exams.

Enjoy!