After you finish the first part of Angels in America for class on Monday, I'd like you take time to reflect on the question of relationships in this play. Which relationship do find the most interesting, vexing, compelling, or perhaps even inexplicable? In your comment to this post, I'd like you to explore this relationship and the two main characters who comprise it. Share with the rest of us what sense you're making of these characters, their relationship, the conflict or attraction that might be said to exist between them, and why you think it's significant. Ultimately, I'd be curious to see how you would relate this relationship back to the bigger questions this play raises about HIV/AIDS, sexuality, justice, or any other larger theme you seeing being essential to understanding this play.
Aim for a substantial post of at least 250 words. I look forward to reading what you write.
Of all the relationships in the book, I took interest between Louis and Belize. They seem to connect when talking about large scale issues like politics. Louis states in during a conversation that “there are no angels in America, no spiritual past, no racial past, there’s only the political, and the decoys and the ploys to maneuver around the inescapable battle of politics, the shifting downwards and outwards of political power to the people” (Kushner, 96). In response, Belize says “POWER to the People! AMEN!” (Kushner, 96). As the reader, this relationship is a connection of ideas that identify a large scale problem. In the case of HIV/AIDS, it is often stereotyped as an issue associated with same sex relations. Same sex relationships especially with sexual acts involved, because it is seen as unusual as oppose to sex between opposite sex relations, it is very easy to use difference as a scapegoat. Additionally, a higher power such as government is the major contributing factor towards a negative or positive outlook. Everyone has their own opinions, but that is changeable when there is a universal outlook on an issue. Thus, if political officials say that HIV/AIDS is associated with gays or lesbians, then it would likely influence a large portion of the population to think the same. Louis also states “Racists just try to use race here as a tool in a political struggle” (Kushner, 96). Politics can be evil in an arguably, when people’s thoughts are promoted amongst society. Belize’s statement however, points out how people can change others’ understanding. Individuals have power and can promote negative thought, but also have the ability to counter this. If people stand up for what they believe in, then politics can also be used in a good way to defy stereotypes in an effort for equality.
ReplyDeleteWhile reflecting upon what I had gleaned from the first part of Angels in America, I found myself spending a significant amount of time analyzing the hierarchical and conflicting relationship between Roy Cohn and his doctor Henry.
ReplyDeleteRoy and Henry are bound to each other through medicalization; however, the power that is (often unequally) exchanged between the two is ironically manifested in the form of role reversal. For instance, although Henry’s occupation has given him the power to reap the benefits of the medical-industrial complex (e.g., contributing to the mass hysteria caused by AIDS-related propaganda by outing Roy as gay, profiting from Roy’s sickness, using Roy’s fatal condition as an outlet for establishing dominance) to the eventual detriment of Roy, Roy’s wealth and reputation temporarily intimidate Henry into subordination. This exertion of authority becomes clearly apparent when Roy threatens to “…proceed, systematically, to destroy [Henry’s] reputation and [his] practice and [his] career in New York State” (Kushner 45). Nevertheless, although Roy possesses more social capital than Henry, Henry creates yet another power exchange by reminding Roy that “the NIH in Bethesda has a new drug called AZT with a two-year waiting list that not even I can get you onto. So…tell the First Lady you need in on an experimental treatment for liver cancer…but what it boils down to is very bad news” (Kushner 47).
Furthermore, this interaction between Roy and Henry vividly illustrates the social concept of (homo)sexuality. After Henry insinuates that Roy has AIDS due to engaging in risky homosexual activity, Roy becomes aggressively defensive and defines homosexuals as “…men who in fifteen years of trying cannot pass a pissant antidiscrimination bill through City council [and men] who know nobody.” In turn, Roy defines himself as “…a heterosexual man…who fucks around with guys” (Kushner 46-7). In this scenario, Roy bases the construct of heterosexuality upon the generation of social capital; according to him, gay men have little to no social capital whereas their straight counterparts do. Through this perspective, Roy’s high social ranking allows him to continue to identify as a heterosexual.
The relationship that I am most interested in is Joe and Louis. Although it is not a committed relationship like the other ones, I think this relationship is the most shocking. These two characters are very different; Joe is a highly respected workingman, while Louis, who still works, is not as high on the ladder. They have conversations once in a while at work and have had sexual tension throughout the book. However, Joe has been in the closet until recently because of his job, wife, and family, while Louis has been openly gay dating Prior.
ReplyDeleteThe thing that interests me is that they fell together when both of their loved ones because very sick. Joe’s wife has been taking pills for years but now it has gotten worse because of his uncertainty of himself. Prior has been put in the hospital because of his illness and Louis cant handle it. These two men, Joe and Louis, found each other because neither of them wanted to be alone (123). This need for love and comfort is a very normal thing within the human population; I feel like this is one of the largest reasons for cheating and this book portrays it very well. Since the people these men loved were unable to love them back in this moment of hardship, they were able to join together and try to compensate.
I am curious to see how this relationship plays out because of the differences between the two men and their loved ones that are holding them back.
The relationship between Louis and Joe caught my interest; their scenes always involved a playful and foreshadowing nature of Joe’s homosexuality, which Louis calls him out on when they first meet. Their attitudes are strikingly parallel: Joe, a conservative Mormon, polite and proper, and Louis, bold, sarcastic, vulgar, doing whatever he pleases. They always have conversations that seem meaningful in the way of development of both of their characters, and in the last scene where they run into each other in the park, I found it only fitting that Louis is the first person that Joe pursues after defining himself as homosexual. Joe has lived a lie for so long and has finally decided that he can’t live it any longer. I feel like the pivotal moment in Joe’s mentality when the two characters are sitting on the steps and Joe reveals he doesn’t want to walk into the justice building again, and I also feel like it’s very important that he reveals this to Louis. Louis doesn’t hide his sexuality, and in a way I feel like Louis’ flaunting of self is a motivating factor in Joe’s decision to drop the fakeness. Joe’s proclamation that he is unsatisfied in his work life doubles to express his dissatisfaction with his sexual self; I find myself feeling like there is a connection between Joe’s rejection of his professional career and Joe’s pursuit of a homosexual relationship. Is there some sort of theme here about homosexuality being a restraint in the career field? While Joe portrays himself as a heterosexual and is a Justice, Louis is but a clerk and a flamboyantly homosexual character; they both reveal this aspect in their first scene. It’s subtle, but it bothers me. It reinforces the heterosexual privilege.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteAfter finishing the first part in Angels in America I was drawn to the relationship that comes between Harper and herself in the tangible form of her imagined friend, Mr. Lies. This relationship, although confusing and not necessarily real, is still vital to understanding the commentary on sexuality and justice in the play.
ReplyDeleteMr. Lies appears in the first Act when Harper is alone in the house as Joe is taking one of his walks. He appears suddenly and is a part of Harper’s mental self as she has created him in her own mind. Mr. Lies comes in the form of a travel agent, promising Harper to whisk her away to anywhere that she wants to go to take a vacation from life. This is ironic considering that Harper does not leave the house and often is trapped inside. What I think is significant in this relationship is that Mr. Lies appears whenever Harper is struggling with her relationship with Joe as she struggles to feel what she needs from the man whom she loves. This is evident in their first meeting when what is plaguing Harper comes down to her life and Joe’s role in it. She says, “maybe my life is really fine, maybe Joe loves me and I am only crazy thinking otherwise, or maybe not, maybe it’s even worse than I know, maybe … I want to know, maybe I don’t. The suspense, Mr. Lies, it’s killing me” (Kushner 18). He then disappears but comes again in Act 2, Scene 9 after Harper has made the realization that Joe is homosexual and could never lover her or crave her the way that she loves and craves him. She then spirals into despair and goes off to Antarctica with Mr. Lies which is a place of cold isolation mirroring how Harper is feeling inside.
I think this relationship ultimately sheds light on injustice in the LGBTQ community and religious perspectives that are hard to reconcile with sexuality. Here, it is evident in the play that Joe is suffering by living his life as a lie and having to go through his life unhappy and constrained because of firm religious beliefs and being born into a society that does not accept homosexuality. But, Harper is suffering also as she has been caught in the injustice crossfire. Their society and religion perpetuates an atmosphere of damnation and hatred towards what Joe is thus causing him to suppress his true innermost self. Harper has married and loves a man who will never be able to love her or desire her in the way that she does him leaving her broken-hearted, unhappy, and lost. This is why the Mr. Lies relationship is important because it demonstrates that a society that relies on suppression rather than truth and freedom of expression affects many more than those who are oppressed. It causes everyone to question what is real and what is actually just a façade.
So far of all the characters, I like Prior the best. He is the facing a giant issue in his life, and yet he does so with honesty and even some humor. Prior is no nonsense when he tells Louis about his illness in the beginning, yet he knows Louis too well and knows and his, for lack of a better phrase, flaws. He knows Louis isn’t going to be strong enough to face the illness with him, yet he still tries to give him the chance to say that he will stick it out. Prior is perceptive and witty in most cases. He has this relationship with Emily the nurse, Belize, and even with his ancestral Priors. He is raw and real feeling, he states he is scared and gets angry when he feels angry. I’m not sure what other relationships to contrast or compare his with because he is not too complex, yet pretty straightforward. He is almost the opposite of Louis. Louis hems and haws and rationalizes and talks around everything. He comes across self-absorbed or concerned maybe, in comparison to Prior. Prior in some ways is strength(in spirit) and Louis is weakness, even though one is able bodied and the other is fighting for his life. I don’t mean to sound dismissive of Louis, he is more complicated, and exemplifies a struggle within himself and with obligations and love. It is difficult to watch your loved one become ill and it is a roller coaster ride being the sick one.
ReplyDeleteThe character I find the most interesting is Roy. He is very fast paced and he speaks his mind without holding anything back. He is often multitasking and cursing in almost every scene. The relationship that I find the most interesting is Roy and Joes relationship. Joe is subordinate to Roy and often Joe finds himself just listening to Roy cursing and yelling. Roy is very sick but hides it from most people and Joe is a homosexual and also hides it from most people. Roy gives Joe a job in Washington, that first seems out of the good of Roy’s heart but later we find out that Roy needs Joe in Washington as his inside source to help Roy. Roy gets a letter that says his lawyer license may be revoked and he pleads and forces Joe to take the job even though Joe would be moving away from his wife. All this makes for a very interesting dynamic between the two. Although it is not obvious Roy does seem to genuinely like and trust Joe and seems to enjoy his company. There is an unspoken attraction between the two that causes an interesting dynamic because Joe has a wife, although Joe does tell Roy that he loves him. Roy also seems to believe in Joe and knows he is capable of more and wants to push and challenge Joe. Roy sometimes seems misguide and cruel but his intentions overall seem to be for Joes benefit. I think the bigger picture in this relationship is Roy has limited time to live and Joe is caught in the web of life. I think Roy can detect Joe is caught in the web of life and with his limited time left on earth he wants to see Joe fight his way out of the web of life and in turn not have his lawyer license revoked. Their relationship is complex but I think they are both secretly trying to benefit the other and in-turn benefit themselves.
ReplyDeleteAs I am working through the remaining scenes in the first part of Angels in America I am continuously concerned with the relationship between Roy and Joe. From the first interaction between Roy and Joe I found myself feeling some sort of discomfort with the way that Roy treated Joe and the notable insecurity that Joe felt around him. In the scene when we find that Roy is diagnosed with AIDS, I found myself suspecting that Roy and Joe’s power struggles and relationship may be more complicated than just a work environment.
ReplyDeleteIt is clear that Roy is characterizing a very powerful figure with a lot of political influence and capital. As I have expressed in classes before, power dynamics in relationships are a real cause for concern for me. When Roy is discussing his diagnosis with his doctor Henry he tells Henry, “I have sex with men. But unlike nearly every other man of whom this is true, I bring the guy I’m screwing to the White House…” (46). I found this quote to be particularly disturbing because Roy is recognizing that he has power, and he is using that power to receive sexual favors in turn for political gain. As Joe contemplates the possibility of joining Roy in Washington, it seems that Roy is getting increasingly manipulative and pushing Joe into position that he does not want to be in. In a conversation he identifies himself as a father figure for Joe and seems to be manipulative of the fact that Joe did not have a strong loving father figure in his life (59). This scene is interesting juxtaposed along with the interaction between Louis and the “Man”. Putting these two interactions together in one scene seems to be strengthening the notion that Joe and Roy are in a relationship where there is a clear power imbalance and potential for abuse.
Joe in particular concerns me as a potential victim of abuse by someone like Roy because of his current vulnerability. The fact that Joe is from a conservative and religious background is not very helpful particularly in the context of the marginalization and invisibility that gay men faced particularly in the 80s. He seems to make a desperate attempt to receive some sort of help or community by coming out to his mother who quickly dismisses their whole interaction. Joe describes his passion as a losing battle seemingly between life and death, he tells Harper, “I try to learn to live dead, just numb, but then I see someone I want” (81). Joe seems to be in a vulnerable position where he can no longer hid who he is, but at the same time he cannot find anyone who accepts him.
I think one of the most interesting relationships we see in this first part is shared between Joe and Harper. Joe is a homosexual man, and he’s spent his entire life up until these last few moments hiding his sexuality from everyone he’s ever known. Harper is his wife, who appears to be blindsided by his realization and admittance of his sexuality. However, we see a few things that suggest Harper has always been aware, at least unconsciously, that Joe was not attracted to her, that Joe was lying to himself and to her, that Joe was not who he said he was.
ReplyDeleteIn the first assigned reading, Harper cries about the sky falling down, and she tells Joe there’s a man hiding in the bedroom with a knife, waiting to hurt her. I think it’s interesting that Harper has realized there is a certain sort of danger in the bedroom, that it is in the bedroom that a man can hurt her. We assume, initially, that the injury would be something physical, but it might be worthwhile to consider the emotional metaphor behind it all.
When Joe and Harper come together for an altercation in the reading for today’s class, this is what they say:
Joe: Who are these men? I never understood it. Now I know.
Harper: What?
Joe: It’s me.
Harper: It is?
Joe: I’m the man with the knives.
Harper: You are?
Harper: Oh God …
Joe: I’m sorry …
Harper: I recognize you now.
Joe: Oh. Wait, I … Oh!
[…]
I’m bleeding (86).
In this moment, Joe admits that he sees himself as the man with the potential to hurt Harper, the one who has been hiding with something dangerous: a knife, a secret. Harper asks three questions in this sequence, which might indicate her ignorance and realization, or maybe even a stubbornness in accepting what she is being told.
In the larger context of sexuality and AIDS, I am concerned with how their dialogue ends. Joe brings his hand to his mouth and pulls it away covered in blood. Because this is a split scene shared with Louis and Prior, we are basically forced by association to assume that Joe might be at risk as well. I wonder if Harper thinks about this possibility, or if Joe considers it, either.
Sorry for the late post, everyone!
ReplyDeleteAfter class today, I began to think of all of these relationships as one big web, and it just makes the genius of this play that much greater.
As I said in class today, I am very interested in the relationship between Joe (he's a hot topic today) and his mother, Hannah.
I think I am most interested in them because this was the first conversation where I was SHOCKED by what was being said?! Ah, so many painful things. From the beginning of their conversation you can tell that, first off, Joe feels the need to be black out drunk in order to call his mother. His mother then tells him, hey your dad never loved you, and you begin to see why Joe has such a struggle with his identity. He has never, not even when he was a child, had the chance to be who he wanted to be. He has been suppressed for so long that he can't accept who he is. Other than the obvious religious aspect of this, I think a lot of this has to do with his family.
How sad it is we live in a society where families cease to love each other because of sexual orientations, but that is another discussion on its own.
From this conversation over the phone, the reader can tell that this relationship is only just beginning again. This is backed-up later when Hannah begins to discuss moving from her home to Brooklyn, back to her son to live with him and Harper in the second half of the play.
I am excited to see how this relationship changes and why it changes. After all, Hannah began as a character filled with hate for her own son. How does that feel? How does that change?
I find two relationships very interesting. The relationship between Joe and Louis along with the relationship between Louis and Prior. Louis has issues with illness and this getting hard. He loves Louis but he can't watch him die. Prior is having a hard with this because he loves Louis so very much but he doesn't think his love is returned. This relationship is very complex and sad. Prior is dying. I mean with the drugs he is doing some what better but it doesn't change the fact he is dying and Louis can't be there yet he wants to be.
ReplyDeleteThis is where the relationship between Louis and Joe gets very interesting because Louis punishes himself but also tries to find solace in Joe. Joe blames himself for his wife going crazy but he cannot deny that he is a homosexual. He punishes him self but also finds solace in Louis. They have such pain from hurting their loved one yet they do not want to be alone. They crave to not be alone just like their loved ones. It is complex and difficult just like real life.
I think in these relationships it shows how much AIDS can destroy lives but not because of death just the illness it self can tear apart loved ones because it is so hard to watch your loved one die especially from such a horrible disease.