Most of the characters in Tony Kushner's Angels in America struggle with their sexuality. Reflected in this struggle, the homosexual characters are flawed to the degree at which they hide their sexuality. Prior, Belize, Louis, Joe, and Roy all deal with this issue in the course of the play. Prior is the least closeted homosexual while Roy is the most. Prior is chosen to be a prophet, is morally upright, and represents good. Roy, the unlawful lawyer, represents evil. Belize, Louis, and Joe fall in between Prior and Roy on the scale. By having these particular characters represent what they do, Tony Kushner places a negative stigma on those in the closet and emphasizes his negative opinion on closeted homosexuals.
Prior is one of the most openly gay characters in the play. In act two, Prior suffers in the hospital. He says, "I want Louis. I want my fucking boyfriend, where the fuck is he? I'm dying, I'm dying, where's Louis?" (Kushner 66). He shows his dependence on his boyfriend and his need to seek comfort in his homosexual partner during this traumatic time. Also, just before the angel arrives at the end of part one, Prior says, "I can handle pressure, I am a gay man and I am used to pressure" (Kushner 123). He puts his strong suits forth, including his homosexuality, to convince himself he can handle the situation. In act four, in response to Hannah questioning his homosexuality, Prior says, "Oh, is it that obvious? Yes. I am" (Kushner 231). He has no problem admitting his homosexuality, even to complete strangers. Because of Prior's openness throughout the play, he is, without a doubt, completely out of the closet.
Belize is also very open and out of the closet. The way he speaks to people clearly indi...
... middle of paper ...
... will ultimately get what they deserve ? death. This conclusion can be generalized and not taken literally, and in that way applied directly to everyday situations. Even so, this remains another startling conclusion gathered from Tony Kushner?s work.
In his play, Tony Kushner writes about flawed homosexual characters. While doing so, he develops an interesting relationship: the farther in the closet one is, the more flawed or evil one is. By making this startling correlation, Kushner places a negative stigma on those who are not open about their homosexuality. Through this evident relationship, Kushner strongly conveys his negative attitude toward closeted gays; thereby adding startling depth to his play, Angels in America.
Works Cited
Kushner, Tony. Angels in America. New York, New York: Theatre Communications Group, Inc., 1995.
Life for most homosexuals during the first half of the Twentieth century was one of hiding, being ever so careful to not give away their true feelings and predilections. Although the 1920s saw a brief moment of openness in American society, that was quickly destroyed with the progress of the Cold War, and by default, that of McCarthyism. The homosexuals of the 50s “felt the heavy weight of medical prejudice, police harassment and church condemnation … [and] were not able to challenge these authorities.” They were constantly battered, both physically and emotionally, by the society that surrounded them. The very mention or rumor of one’s homosexuality could lead to the loss of their family, their livelihood and, in some cases, their lives. Geanne Harwood, interviewed on an National Public Radio Broadcast commemorating the twentieth anniversary of the Stonewall Riots, said that “being gay before Stonewall was a very difficult proposition … we felt that in order to survive we had to try to look and act as rugged and as manly as possibly to get by in a society that was really very much against us.” The age of communist threats, and of Joseph McCarthy’s insistence that homosexuals were treacherous, gave credence to the feeling of most society members that homosexuality was a perversion, and that one inflicted was one to not be trusted.
What I’ve noticed in the film is that the two main characters fit two standard archetypes of gay men. One who welcomes their sexuallity and one suppresses it. Ennis Del Mar is a man who before the story started was engaged to a woman named Alma. When Ennis and Jack begin their sexual relationship and Ennis tells Jack that he wasn’t queer,
...e social changes brought about this period. He cites the growing sensationalism of sex covered in the media as a prime driver behind the sexual orthodoxy in American culture (Chauncey 1994, 359). During this witch hunt, he draws a silver lining. Using the scholarship of others such as John D’Emilio, he cites that this period brought a greater bond to the gay community by forging brotherhood of adversity which would then come back into play in the 1960’s as an experiential touchstone for the Civil Rights era (Chauncey 1994, 360). Chauncey nestles his own narrative of the gay community in New York within the larger narrative of gay life in America filling in the gaps of secondary sources through his own primary work.
The first story centers on Gene Robinson, now the first openly gay Episcopal bishop, and the son of a loving, church-going couple from Kentucky. Next, we meet the Poteats, a Baptist family from North Carolina with a gay son and daughter. Then there are the Reitans, from Minnesota, whose son Jake comes from a long line of Lutheran pastors. When Jake came out of the closet, some of the locals threw a brick through their windshield and wrote “fag” in chalk outside the house. The mother’s description of immediately scrubbing the profanity off the driveway was very poignant. Perhaps the most heartbreaking story was that of Mary Lou Wallner, a Christian fundamentalist who rejected her lesbian daughter, which ...
... homosexual being felt in the world around the 1970’s and 1980’s. The time period in which this play was written was one of great dissonance to the LGBT movement. For Harvey Fierstein to be so bold and public with his own lifestyle was truly admirable and brave. Fierstein shows us that ignorance can destroy a life because of what is unknown.
In the past decades, the struggle for gay rights in the Unites States has taken many forms. Previously, homosexuality was viewed as immoral. Many people also viewed it as pathologic because the American Psychiatric Association classified it as a psychiatric disorder. As a result, many people remained in ‘the closet’ because they were afraid of losing their jobs or being discriminated against in the society. According to David Allyn, though most gays could pass in the heterosexual world, they tended to live in fear and lies because they could not look towards their families for support. At the same time, openly gay establishments were often shut down to keep openly gay people under close scrutiny (Allyn 146). But since the 1960s, people have dedicated themselves in fighting for
As I reflected more and more on Wilson's masterpiece, my anger turned to curiosity Instead of my curiosity waning, it grew. I felt like I was unraveling a huge ball of yarn. In a play about family, a million different issues lived. I was astounded at the number of issues that Wilson touched upon, issues ranging from family relationships, to problems in the workplace, racial tensions, and infidelity. And under each one of these was another, underlying issue, the reason, or the catalyst that enabled these to prevail. Part of the genius of this piece is that it is like an onion, with many layers, and can be interpreted on many different levels.
In Tony Kushner’s Angels in America, the interconnection of people and events, that might ordinarily be viewed as disconnected or unrelated, is implicitly presented in the characters section. Dual roles are implemented by a playwright that has one actor portraying the roles of two or more characters, with or without thematic intentions. The use of “dual roles” in several scenes of this play can be viewed as a demonstration of Kushner’s effort in maintaining the interconnectedness between characters, communities (i.e. queer, heterosexual, AIDS and political communities) and events to which they are relative. This essay will argue that Kushner’s use of dual role’s effectively interconnects characters, events and their communities that may be seen as usually unrelated. Analysis of four specific characters, Antarctica, Oceania, Australia and Europa, in Act Five, Scene Five of “Perestroika”, will demonstrate the connection of each Act Five, Scene Five character, to the actors main character based on the implicit evidence presented in the actors “primary” and “secondary” roles, the scenes dialogue and the character interactions. As one will see, by implementing dual roles, Kushner is able to expand or preserve the concept of a major character while the actor portrays another character, keeping the audience from having to completely renegotiate their knowledge between what they physically see of new characters and actually use the new context to view triumphs and struggles for a major character.
(Baude, 21). This quote provides details of why the finality in the decisions regarding death may not accurately represent the justice the accused deserves. It augments the ultimate overarching point made by Scheck and Rust-Tierney that we should not determine death. Despite the strong points made throughout the debate, there were key issues that Schneck and Rust-Tierney adequately refuted. The first was their failure when they lacked a counter to Scheidegger’s point on how inmates are often treated in the facilities themselves.
The movie ‘Philadelphia’ explores prejudice against having AIDS [also being homosexual]. In the film, Andrew Beckett (played by Tom Hanks) is a lawyer with a huge opportunity as a lawyer in front of him. When he finds out he had AIDS he chose not to tell his firm mentor about either his disease or his sexual orientation. Andrew is fired for, as his firm members claim, ‘incompetence’ however we can see it is more. Andrew was fired because he had AIDS and was assumed gay (at this time AIDS was know the ‘gay disease’). The movie shows Andrews struggle to be treated equally.
Prior is openly gay, and does not lie about his HIV status. Even though living the life he does, must be very difficult in the world he lives in, he makes the most of what he has. He has a good sense of humor about what is happening to him, even though he is dying, he tries to help other people too. The way that he is openly gay and HIV positive helps Harper. She learns to accept the fact that Joe likes men. Prior and Harper are going through almost the same situation here, they both love unfaithful men. It just so happens that both of the men they love, get together. Belize is also an openly homosexual man; he is a nurse who treats AIDS patients. The both of them do not try to pretend to be anything but who they really are. These characters can be an inspiration to people to show their true identity, even if you will be judged for it. Living in a homophobic society, being homosexual can a never ending task. Prior and Belize do not want to change themselves just to keep a good reputation and to fit into the standards of the society they live in. It may be a frightening thought to show your genuine identity, when you aren’t accepted in the society you live in but that doesn’t mean you should hide it. Everyone should love the way they are, regardless of what others think or how you will be looked at by
The 1990s saw surge of gay characters in both television and movies. From Ellen Degeneres and her character Ellen Morgan coming out under much scrutiny on the TV show ‘Ellen,’ to Julia Roberts and Rupert Everett comedically playing off each other in the motion picture ‘My Best Friend’s Wedding.’ Sure, gays and lesbians have been around forever, especially in Hollywood. But never has there been a time to be more out. With the popularity of shows like Will and Grace, which feature leading gay characters, as well as Dawson’s Creek and it’s supporting character of teenager Jack McPhee, we are slowly seeing gay and lesbian characters creeping into the mainstream media.
At first glance, Samuel Beckett’s Waiting for Godot and Tony Kushner’s Angels in America appear to serve as two individual exercises in the absurd. Varying degrees of the fantastical and bizarre drives the respective stories, and their respective conclusions hardly serve as logical resolutions to the questions that both Beckett and Kushner’s characters pose throughout the individual productions. Rather than viewing this abandonment of reality as the destination of either play, it should be seen as a method used by both Beckett and Kushner to force the audience to reconsider their preconceived notions when understanding the deeper emotional subtext of the plays. By presenting common and relatable situations such as love, loss, and the ways in which humans deal with change and growth, in largely unrecognizable packaging, Kushner and Beckett are able to disarm their audience amidst the chaos of the on stage action. Once the viewer’s inclination to make assumptions is stripped by the fantastical elements of either production, both playwrights provide moments of emotional clarity that the audience is forced to distill, analyze, and ultimately, comprehend on an individual level.
Tony Kushner’s play, Angels in America, comments on a number of social issues of its time; ranging from political to societal. Additionally, it incorporates many concepts discussed in the Modern Condition courses. Thinkers such as Nietzsche, Borges, and DeBeauvoir are specifically represented in the play through the characters presented. Kushner uses his characters to convey the ideas of these thinkers in the context of the culture the play takes place in.
“An eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth” is how the saying goes. Coined by the infamous Hammurabi’s Code around 1700 BC, this ancient expression has become the basis of a great political debate over the past several decades – the death penalty. While the conflict can be whittled down to a matter of morals, a more pragmatic approach shows defendable points that are far more evidence backed. Supporters of the death penalty advocate that it deters crime, provides closure, and is a just punishment for those who choose to take a human life. Those against the death penalty argue that execution is a betrayal of basic human rights, an ineffective crime deterrent, an economically wasteful option, and an outdated method. The debate has experienced varying levels of attention over the years, but has always kept in the eye of the public. While many still advocate for the continued use of capital punishment, the process is not the most cost effective, efficient, consistent, or up-to-date means of punishment that America could be using today.