Sunday, November 18, 2012
Indentity in "Venus in Furs"
I was very interested in the huge role that identity plays in "Venus in Furs." I really liked the line delivered by Thomas regarding his job as adapter/director of the play. He says to Vanda, "[...] Sometimes today I felt as if I didn't know the first thing about them -- or this play. There's that moment when the actor turns to you and says, 'What should I do, who am I right here,' and you have no idea. You can't remember who you are, much less what they're supposed to be" (Ives 21). He makes a very interesting commentary on identity and how others shape yours, just as much as you do and that that can make everything unclear to you. But, what is even more interesting here is the line that Vanda follows his line with. She says, "Just play a director" (Ives 21). And she goes on to act out for him the kinds of thing he should say when asked a question like the one that baffles him so. " 'Sweetheart, I want this part moving and tragic and blah blah -- but funny. And while you're crossing down, could you look out both sides of your head at the same time?'" (Ives 21). Vanda takes her prior experience as an actress and makes it help her help Thomas. But more importantly, she acknowledges here that everything is a performance and that even if the things that he says in situations like this come off as verbal stroking or insincere, they are helpful to both the other as well as himself.
2 comments:
I really liked your isolation of the portion involving Thomas's comparison of the roles of an actor and a director. Specifically the line, "There's that moment when the actor turns to you and says, 'What should I do, who am I right here,' and you have no idea." I found this to be a reflection of society's influence on an individuals identity; society being the director and the individuals in society being the actors. It seems that, like a director, society has a predetermined idea of how the people within the community should act and feel, and correct, or even cut those that do not fit in. It is interesting to see Thomas's viewpoint of this as a director, or as someone in society who decides what the social norm is. It seems that he doesn't really know what the identity of the individual should be, let alone his own, even though he is the one who developed the character in the first place. This makes me wonder if the societal dictators are aware of their influence on individuals in society, and if they follow their own rules or not.
That's an interesting parallel Katherine. I thought this moment really tied into the themes we have been discussing in class thus far as well. I also thought it was a humanizing moment for Thomas, who really strikes me as an unlikable, disconnected artist in most of the scenes in which he talks about his work as a writer and director. When he says he is directing for the first time because no directors quite get it right and refers to child abuse as a trivial social issue, he seems to position himself as both a superior creator and interpreter of art. Not only does he make art "object" in these moments, but he also degrades other people as unable to understand art, objectifying his peers. His acknowledgement that he is full of shit like everyone else rather than a superior intellectual is refreshing.
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.