Strange Interlude, and the Quest for Truth Thierry
Dubost In Strange Interlude, one of O’Neill’s challenging works, the playwright addressed the question of truth when he staged the epic story of Nina Leeds. Starting from Nina’s rejection of lies, he displayed a multi-faceted quest for truth. Its very nature was questioned by characters who - confronted with self-delusion, human frailty and their lack of freedom - gradually realized the complexity of their relationship to truth. In this uncommon play inner monologues, together with Freud’s theory enabled O’Neill to pursue further his reflection on truth, to the point of eventually calling into question the relevance of accepted western philosophical perspectives. In
nine-act Strange Interlude, act one corresponds to an opening
scene in classical drama. It serves as an introduction to the conflicts
later developed in the play, among which is Nina's loathing of a
society that prevented her from becoming a woman. Her revolt results
from what she characterizes as a basic social abhorrence of truth. Nina
violently states the causes for her rejection, and the intensity of her
bereavement gives further weight to her claims according to which
people's lives are plagued by their adherence to a fundamental
misconception of what life should be: Nina.
Say lie - (She says it drawing it
out) Liiie! Now say life. Liife! You see! Life is just a long drawn
out lie with a sniffing sigh at the end! (1) The
"sniffing sigh at the end" illustrates her gloomy outlook but,
venting her anger, she implies that she seeks a more positive social
contract. Indeed, in act one, both her dissatisfaction and her departure
initiate a search for something different, an existence devoid of a
corruption due to unacceptable social demands. Her uncompromising
attitude, with its clear-cut opposition between truth and lies, becomes
the starting point of what is staged as an epic quest, calling into
question, beyond Nina’s own experience, other individual and social
understandings of what truth is. Although
the concept of truth is not analyzed as such in the play, it stands out
in a clair-obscur way, because
Nina believes that pointing one's finger at the lies of the world is a
way of revealing the truth. In her view, truth might correspond to
"something held or accepted as true,” as "the absence of
pretense or imitation(2)".
Other protagonists hold different views, and use the word signifying
"consistent with fact or reality.” Whatever meaning characters
take into account, the central role of truth in act one and its
importance in the presentation of people’s lives remains a striking
factor. Conflicts appear at different levels, and the discord between Nina and her father paves the way for a metaphysical reflection. The universe in which Nina would like to live, as well as the one she rejects, is based on contrasts between right and wrong, good and evil, truth and lies. Starting from these oppositions, she - like other people - tries to give a meaning to her life. In this respect, despite her challenging attitude, she remains a representative of Western Thought, in which dichotomies between antagonistic concepts prevail. |
Sam. Tell her you've decided... for her sake... to face the truth... that she can't love you... she's tried... she's acted like a good sport... but she's beginning to hate you... and you can't blame her... she wanted children... and you haven't been able... (3) According to Nina's harsh standards, her husband's attitude commands respect because once he realizes his failure, he accepts to pay the price for his deficiency. Yet although Sam wants to face the truth about himself, both his pessimistic and then optimistic delusions regarding paternity call into question his capacity to discover the truth. Sam's extreme blindness is uncommon; still, taking into account his depiction in the play - as an ordinary person - he merely represents human inability to come to terms with truth. Sam’s
relatives and friends partly share his incapacity. Some cannot cope with
reality, as an echo of truth, while others look for it to no avail. Marsden.
Well, then, a little truth for once in a way! Marsden’s insight is more acute than Sam’s. While Sam Evans easily deludes himself into believing he is Gordon's father, Marsden, who cannot live in a fake paradise, only reaps limited benefits out of his restricted self-delusion. He finds himself caught between opposite forces, and while he opts for honesty, duplicity temporarily becomes a means of survival. In the long term however, Marsden's partial awareness of what he hides proves less efficient than Sam’s innocence, and truth is finally disclosed. The revelation of his fear to Nina was a first step towards meeting the challenge he has to face, namely putting an end to his escape policy, and coming to terms with the truth. As the action unfolds, the link between lies and life evolves, and most characters - Nina included - have to resort to lies. Lying seems to be part of people's fates, in so far as they cannot fight against it, whatever their initial wishes may have been. Sam is oblivious to his dramatic plight, but Nina, Mrs. Evans and Darrell have to resort to make-believe in order to help him. Their forced original lie prevents them from being themselves, and Nina - who craves to reveal her adultery to Sam - cannot do so. The relationship between happiness and telling the truth soon becomes more complex than Nina's original anger had suggested. Hiding the truth stands in the way of some characters' happiness, but for Sam mendacity means bliss. Deceit
should not automatically be associated with fate or altruistic attitudes. As
time goes by, Nina's reasons for being untrue lose their sacrificial nature. Nina. You must remember the happiness we've known in each other's arms! You were the only happiness I've ever known in life!
Darrell. (struggling weakly - thinking) In
the opening act, Nina points an accusing finger at her father and at the
puritan moral code that prevents people from telling the truth, but in the
course of the play, she often lies for personal motives(6).
In Strange Interlude, O’Neill
wanted to depict an exceptional woman, and he turns Nina’s confrontation
with truth into a major existential issue. Through her incapacity to come to
terms with truth, the audience understands that such a difficulty is
inherent to human nature,
and that she, like Sam, embodies human frailty. The
main difference between Strange Interlude and traditional plays is that, by systematically
resorting to inner monologues, O’Neill enabled the audience to have access
to what he exposed as the truth. Spectators become omniscient, since the
workings of the characters’ minds are not simply revealed but precisely
described. Professor
Leeds. And there you have it, Charlie - the whole absurd mess! (thinking
with a strident accusation) (Then miserably defending himself)
No!... I acted unselfishly... for her sake!...(7) Monologues
enable O’Neill to depict the battles waged in the minds of his characters.
Here, Professor Leeds dare not quite acknowledge why he asked Gordon not to
marry his daughter. He may not have been conscious of his motives when he
acted, but the prevarication he resorted to builds a mental prison for him,
that will only disappear after he has confessed. As soon as he faces the
truth, he reaches the intimate peace of regained unity and the
transformation of inner monologues illustrates this change. When Professor
Leeds, (or even Charlie and Nina in the last scene) speak to other
characters, monologues are less frequent, and the internal division that
characterized them disappears. It follows that inner monologues play a
double role concerning truth. First, they are means of exposing internal
tensions experienced by characters who suffer from the separation of their
acts from their true feelings. Then, for the audience, this intimate
disconnection reveals how far protagonists are from the truth, whether it be
about themselves or their relationship with the world. Professor Leeds,
who is the first character to experience Nina’s magic cure - accepting to
tell the truth - has some doubts about the possibility of acting so
genuinely: Professor
Leeds. Let us say I persuaded myself it was for your sake. That may be true.
You are young. You think one can live with truth (8). Professor
Leeds does not share his daughter's view, that living is lying. However, he
admits that there is a connection between the two things, stating that the
link mainly has to do with man's capacity for living with the truth. One
cannot live with the truth, even if one is vaguely aware of it, simply
because it cannot be told. Lies become a kind of necessity, not so much
because the characters feel like inventing fake stories, but because these
protecting screens help people survive. Some
characters who cannot endure truth seek other roads to happiness, because
they do not share the results of Professor Leeds’ late discovery. For
them, deception brings a temporary relief, but Marsden challenges the
efficiency of such escapes, and he summarizes the impossibility of any such
liberation. Marsden.
My running away was about as successful as his... as if one could leave
one's memory behind (9). During
performance, the actors' monologues illustrate this clash between a wish to
hide the truth and an everlasting trial, but in reality, the truth cannot be
concealed. The protagonists play a permanent hide-and-seek game with truth,
but they are never in a position to control it. They are sought when they
think they are safely hidden and vice versa - the main idea being that truth
will out - no matter when and how. The
dual aspect of inner monologues indicates that the character is partly
cheating. Whether it is with himself or with the other protagonists does not
matter. Thanks to this technique, O'Neill enables the audience to understand
that the ever-recurring duality, revealing the conflict between two opposing
sides of individuals, causes happiness to be unobtainable. Memory is
associated with guilt, but eradicating the past is impossible, therefore
everyone has to come to terms with it, in order to face truth and find
himself. We previously noted that truth had to give way to lies for
different reasons, some of which did not result from the characters' own
choice. The opposite is also true. Protagonists are sometimes faced with a
reality they had rejected, but which comes to their minds unexpectedly. This
is the case for Marsden and the sexual thoughts he cannot accept, but other
characters also discover unpredictable mental ideas. Darrell. It's nothing to hope - I meant, to worry over! (then violently) God damn it, why did you make me say hope? Nina. (calmly) It may have been in your mind, too, mayn't it? Darrell. No! I've nothing against Sam. I've always been his best friend. He owes his happiness to me.
Nina. (strangely) There are so
many curious reasons we dare not think about for thinking things!
(10) O'Neill
painstakingly uses Freud’s theory, and implies that truth will out at one
stage or another, no matter what the characters may do in order to shirk
from it. Unfortunately, his simplistic Freudian approach does not work very
well. Here, for instance, Darrell’s speech no longer corresponds to his
feelings. By then, Darrell’s possessive love for Nina has vanished, and
his hopes concerning Evans’ death seem irrelevant. Whether
characters endeavor to face the truth or attempt to flee leads to similar
results. Truth cannot be ignored, and trying to hide it makes it appear when
the person least expects it. Consequently, there is a total opposition
between flight and quest, because when the characters try to escape, they
meet with what they wanted to avoid. Conversely, Nina's attempt to find
truth shows how difficult it is to discover the truth about oneself. Another
point is that characters may not be able to face the truth about themselves,
should they discover it too soon. Moreover, while getting away from lies
might be a way of freeing oneself, it proves a hard task because people
gradually become prisoners of the web of lies they have spun. Marsden.
That's what I've been, Nina - a hush-hush whisperer of lies! Now I'm going
to give an honest healthy yell - turn on the sun into shadows of lies -
shout "This is life and this is sex, and here are passion and hatred
and regret and joy and pain and ecstasy, and these are men and women and
sons and daughters whose hearts are weak and strong, whose blood is blood
and not a soothing syrup!" Oh, I can do it, Nina! I can write the
truth! (11) At
the end of his existential journey, Marsden can finally cope with reality,
and hopes to come to terms with life through his writing. As an authorial
representation, Marsden is worth studying, not so much for what it could
reveal of O'Neill's biography, as for the definition of his literary
project. Creating a work of art would then mean that the characters would
represent real human beings, and that a writer would be a person who can
write "the truth”
(12).
Here, Marsden states that through a renewed approach of his characters’
existence, he will reveal what people are unable to perceive, and writing
might become a means of curing people of their blindness. In this respect,
Marsden's attempt is consistent with O’Neill's admiration for Ibsen's Hedda
Gabler, which had enchanted him because it proved that there could be
"a modern theatre where truth might live"
(13). When
we investigate O'Neill's experimentation with a succession of anti-realistic
devices, then we need to recognize that, in part, the experimentation arises
from the dramatist's search for ways of creating "real realism" on
the stage (14). "Real
realism" means what is true. Unfortunately, as was shown by Darrell’s
supposed deadly wishes regarding Sam, after reading Freud and Jung,
O’Neill gives the impression of having believed that ultimately he could
reach the inner truth of individuals. This is exemplified when the
characters speak, and then inwardly comment on what they have just said. The
difference between their feelings and their speeches reveals the gap between
appearances and reality. Even if O'Neill did not quite assimilate thoughts
with truth, but saw truth as the mixture of what people say and what they
feel, his attempt at reaching "real realism" proves inefficient. In
Strange Interlude inner monologues
supposedly correspond to the truth, a device that deprives spectators of the
pleasure of guessing what masks hide. Apparently, the technique fulfills
Marsden's purpose, according to which the author's part consisted in
"writing the truth.” However, O'Neill's inadequate understanding of
Freudian theory recalls Darrell’s initial naïveté in act two. As a
doctor, he believed his scientific knowledge provided him with omniscience,
only to discover at the end of his life, that he had to distance himself
from his former beliefs. In act nine, Darrell even questions the reality of
his paternity although, scientifically, there is no room for doubt. Darrell.
Besides, I'm quite sure Gordon isn't my son, if the deep core of the truth
were known! I was only a body to you (15). He
distances himself from his scientific creed, in favor of a psychological
outlook on a question that was at the core of the play. His paradoxical
attitude proves coherent with that of other characters as if, after a long
quest, once truth was found or told, it lost its importance. Various
philosophical or religious creeds appear in the play, but it seems that -
eventually prevailing among them - are Eastern perspectives. Starting from
an acute conflict analyzed in western terms, Nina moves on to an Eastern
perspective, where wou wei,
spontaneous inaction prevails. Once she finds her Way, differences between
truth and lies disappear since they become one common thing. At the end of
the play, both Charlie and Nina reach a higher plane, and the quest for what
is true disappears since they have found a truth that they need not express
because they feel it. When
O’Neill wrote Strange Interlude, he disclosed what was happening in the minds of
his characters. To do so, he resorted to inner monologues that he sometimes
used in a very didactic form. He showed that people's deliberate attempts at
reaching truth proved fruitless because the result of their quest did not
solely depend on individual will. In this way, O'Neill put himself in a
position where he could give his audience a clue as to what truth was, and
illustrated how it could be found. In the course of the play, he repeatedly
indicated that trying to gain access to truth hardly ever enabled his
characters to reach it, while escape strategies led to opposite results.
Eventually, his authorial figure, initially embodied by Marsden came to be
also incarnated by Darrell, whose scientific certainties are finally called
into question, in the same way as O’Neill’s are. Through his characters’ epic quest, O’Neill completed his reflection on truth, and showed that truth could not be discovered as such, but that it could be felt. Beyond that unsurprising conclusion, the vicissitudes of the characters’ lives result in changed philosophical perspectives. These alterations not only concern the illusory nature of people’s attempt at self-assertion as a way of reaching the truth, but also radically challenge duality as a relevant system of interpretation of the world. Both for characters and for O’Neill’s authorial commitment in the quest for truth, initial Western certainties seem to give way to Eastern wisdom, if not as a definite clue to people’s search for truth, at least as a renewed outlook on life. (1)
Eugene O'Neill, Strange
Interlude. The Plays of Eugene O'Neill,
vol. 3 (New York; The
Modern Library, Random House, 1982)
40. (2) Oxford Dictionary. (3)
Eugene O'Neill, Strange
Interlude op. cit.,
92. (4)
Eugene O'Neill, Strange Interlude
op. cit., 42. (5)
Eugene O'Neill, Strange
Interlude op. cit.,
173. (6) And O’Neill insists that society is also concerned by a tendency to hide the truth, to the point that at times, Marsden shows that its very survival depends on its capacity to make people believe in false creeds. Marsden. I didn't fight... Physically unfit... not like Gordon... Gordon in flames... How she must resent my living! thinking of me, scribbling in press bureau... louder and louder lies... drown the guns and the screams... deafen the world with lies... hired choir of liars! Eugene O'Neill, Strange Interlude op. cit., 14. (7)
Eugene O'Neill, Strange
Interlude op. cit.,
11. (8)
Eugene O'Neill, Strange
Interlude op. cit.,
20. (9)
Eugene O'Neill, Strange
Interlude op. cit.,
112. (10)
Eugene O'Neill, Strange
Interlude op. cit.,
170. (11)
Eugene O'Neill, Strange
Interlude op. cit.,
176. (12)
Engel rightly relates Marsden's declaration to O’Neill’s objectives
as a playwright: In effect, he would become what an author should be: he
would do precisely what O'Neill had done himself in writing Strange
Interlude.
Edwin Engel, The Haunted Heroes of Eugene 0'Neill, (Cambridge: Harvard
UP, 1953) 221. (13)
Doris Alexander, Eugene
O'Neill's Creative Struggle, (University
Park: Pennsylvania State University Press, 1992) 15. (14)
John H. Houchin, "Introduction," The
Critical Response to Eugene O'Neill,
Ed. John H. Houchin. (Westport,
CT.: Greenwood Press, 1993) 5. |
© Copyright 1999-2008 eOneill.com |