University of Wien

Diploma Thesis

Aspects of Class in Select Plays by Tennessee Williams and their Film Adaptations:

- A Streetcar Named Desire (1947/1951)
- Cat on a Hot Tin Roof (1955/1958)
- Sweet Bird of Youth (1959/1962)

by

Sabine Rohrhofer

Contents

Abbreviations 2

1 Introduction 3
1.1 The Concept of Class 5
1.2 Film Theories 7

2 Tennessee Williams - Some Biographical Notes 13

3 The Plays 17
3.1 A Streetcar Named Desire 23
3.2 Cat on a Hot Tin Roof 39
3.3 Sweet Bird of Youth 50
3.4 Aspects of Class in the Plays 69

4 The Film Adaptations 73
4.1 Tennessee Williams and Hollywood 73
4.2 A Streetcar Named Desire 78
4.3 Cat on a Hot Tin Roof 87
4.4 Sweet Bird of Youth 95
4.5 Aspects of Class in the Film Adaptations 100

5 Conclusion 107

Bibliography 111

Index 135

Appendix 137

1 Introduction

Tennessee Williams is one of America′s greatest playwrights whose talents of creating tension and atmosphere went beyond the métier of theatre and were convincing in the field of motion pictures, too. Elia Kazan, the successful theatre and film director, particularly admired the artist′s gift of evoking emotions:

[Williams] has a positive genius for dealing with subject matter that is on everyone′s mind and part of everyone′s experience, but which has not been dealt with by other writers. (Baer, 16)

In this thesis, however, I shall not attempt at evaluating Williams′s total works. Rather, my object is a comparative analysis of select plays by Tennessee Williams and of their film adaptations: A Streetcar Named Desire (1947, 1951), Cat on a Hot Tin Roof (1955, 1958), and Sweet Bird of Youth (1959, 1962)¹. Special attention has been given to examining the social differences in the plays and films. By focussing on the methods of characterisation employed I shall investigate more or less typical class representations in the two different media. I shall work out the social politics of the playwright, theatre and film directors, and - as far as possible - the actors′ and actresses′ contributions to the dramatic contents. The multitude of interpretations and variations usually gives proof to the value of artistic works.

The methods applied in this thesis are literary research and film studies. As a matter of course, I analysed the plays on their written basis, which raises the general question to what extent the perceptions by the audience and the reader differ. ′The readers of a play must use their imagination to flesh out the characters, and to place them in an appropriate setting′ (Sambrook, 6). Williams gives very precise and evocative stage directions, which help the reader to imagine the situations in many details. Meaning is often conveyed by poetic images. By employing figurative language he tries to ′paint a word picture or convey in words the quality of a sound′ (Sambrook, 48). The critic also notes that in Streetcar, these stage directions contrast and ′serve to underline the uneducated speech′ (Sambrook, 14) of most characters, except for the DuBois sisters. The audience of a play or film, on the other hand, cannot perceive these aspects; rather, the spectators are confronted with a particular setting and with concrete actors and actresses. Additionally, the audience hears the play, including the intonation and emphasis in the dialogues as well as the background music and any additional noises. The reader, however, has the advantage of being able to reread certain scenes or the entire play; generally, there is neither a fixed reading time nor order. In this respect, parallels can be drawn to the viewers of film adaptations on video. The audience in a theatre or cinema, by contrast, experiences the play collectively and on one particular day. The performance takes place within a clear time span and is normally interrupted by intervals.² Williams′s plays are certainly no closet dramas but written for the stage. The quality of the performance on stage, however, depends to a great extent on the artistic skills of the actors and actresses. It is up to them to create tension and to push the action ahead. The audience cannot influence the pace of the action. Thus, the advantage of reading Williams′s plays is twofold: the reader ′can appreciate the beauty of the language as much as its dramatic effectiveness′ (Sambrook, 7). Moreover, the reader is able to dwell on a specific point of the play and to draw comparisons, parallels, or any other conclusions. In my analysis, I have benefited from this opportunity.

1.1 The Concept of Class

When it comes to defining the term class, its manifold uses cause problems with summarising all its abstract meanings. In this thesis, class refers to the characteristic features of social differences, as regards birth, education, profession, possession, and standard of living. Karl Marx′s theory of class is generally confined to the dichotomy between oppressing and oppressed people, possessing and non-possessing people. Yet, it is necessary to differentiate this rather rigid concept of class, as social differences do not exclusively result from these dichotomous contrasts.

Society is not necessarily defined by head-on antagonisms of rival groups; rather, oppositions are manifold, mostly gradual, and only rarely polar. (Mayer, 110n. 2)

Social differences also operate on subtler levels, for instance, as to language use³, value systems, outward appearance, and etiquette. I agree with Ronald Macaulay that ′[b]oth speech and physical appearance provide advance information about an individual′s age, sex, prosperity, and meticulousness, among other things′ (Macaulay, 1). The question to which extent these factors affect social differences will also play a decisive role in my analysis.

It is also important to note that the modus operandi of class formation is abstract and assumes that classes are created as social identities, which means that a collective share certain features and social relations. The members of a class demarcate themselves clearly from other classes. Yet, whereas these assumptions are valid on a general level, they do not necessarily prove true when it comes to detailed portrayals of individuals. Thus, the social class to which the characters in Williams′s plays apparently belong will only serve as a starting point for my analysis; subsequently, I shall explore the characters′ special qualities, which in some cases have a blurring effect as to their apparent class attachment. Since ′social difference, as part of one′s inheritance, is not received but assumed′ (Mayer, 110n. 3), it is worth examining how the characters of Williams′s plays express their strivings for certain social affiliations. I shall show how Williams′s plays deconstruct the myth of America as a classless mass society in which all citizens live on the same conditions as to consumption and possession. This illusion of a unified affluent society contradicts all sociological and economic findings which prove the still existing huge inequality of income, wealth, and economic power in the United States.⁴

Bill Nichols′s concept of class includes another aspect: he emphasises the role of the audience and touches upon the problems of deficient class representation:

[...]

1 The first year in brackets indicates the first publication of the play; the second year indicates its first film release.

2 In 6WUHHWFDU¶V eleven scenes there is no indication of a break for an interval (cf. Sambrook, 43).

3 Cf. Whelehan, 13.

4 Cf. Kolko, 3 – 6.