Spectacle is at work within Mrs. Jenning's service as she places the work of the employed girls and their clientele solely based upon appearance. The services of the girls to “only men of wealth and position, not to say taste and discretion” rather than being frowned upon is praised within the narrative as though Mrs. Jenning is providing a positive business and outlook for the girls (42). Additionally, Mrs. Jenning’s reasoning that “the girl wasn’t available” to Tod portrays the use of spectacle within society by showing that Mrs. Jenning and previous reactions to Tod’s physical appearance heavily impact his life in California and will continue to do so.
Abby, you make a really interesting point about the way Ms. Jennings judges clientele based upon their physical appearances, contributing to the spectacle of society in The Day of the Locust. Through Ms. Jenning, West inverts the roles of a traditional prostitution agency, empowering prostitutes as high-class, selective workers who control men vying for their services. This connects to Tom’s idea of people who come to California to die; being rejected by this high-class sex agency is West’s absurdist representation of glamorous society rejecting those whose images differ from that of the traditional Hollywood hotshot. All interactions are reduced to a surface-level exchange of goods in which only those who can sell themselves thrive, turning people into commodities. For instance, Faye becomes as unattainable for Tom as a life on-screen. She embodies the exclusivity of Hollywood, a space reserved for the wealthy and attractive. Through Faye, West comments on the way surface level appeal--sex appeal or movie appeal--erodes a desire for human relationships, making people believe that they must take physical action to connect with others and prove their worth when, in reality, they only distance themselves further from a sense of authenticity, perpetuating the spectacle of society.
Homer’s personification of his hands exemplifies spectacle in The Day of the Locust. The simple of act of washing his hands in the sink basin becomes an arduous task for Homer: “[His hands] lay quietly on the bottom like a pair of strange aquatic animals. When they were thoroughly chilled and began to crawl about, he lifted them out and hid them in a towel” (56). Depicting his hands as “aquatic animals” not only implies Homer’s lack of control over his body, but also illustrates how people can become estranged from themselves as they become less authentic. For Homer, fast-paced, glamorous life is not so much what alienates him, but rather, routine does. Through Homer, West shows that a stagnant lifestyle can be just as devoid of meaning as a shallow, action-packed one. Homer hides from the sight of his own hands because he does not want to recognize the foreignness of his own body--the way in which he has detached himself from the world around him. His bubbled life conforms to the spectacle of society in a unique way; Homer is the prime example of a blue-collar drone, a cog in the machine, conducting the same work each day as one part of a larger, capitalist system without question.
I thought this was a really well thought out response and I especially like how you described Homer as a "blue-collar drone, a cog in the machine, conducting the same work each day as one part of a larger, capitalist system." However, I wonder how much we can make this assumption because we frankly do not know much about Homer yet other than the fact that he used to work in a hotel. When Homer had to soak his hands to restore feelings of hands, I thought of Homer's sense of touch. He seems to be slow in the mind and now even his body mirrors his brain. Could this be an effect of the draining Hollywood lifestyle? Or is it the draining effects of being a chess piece of a capitalist game board? It's also odd to me that Homer soaks his hands to almost clean the inside, not the outside as most people aim to do when washing their hands. But overall amazing job, Ilana.
Ilana, I think your analysis is very interesting and it discusses ideas that I had not thought about while reading chapter 8. I agree with your idea about how people can become further separated from themselves and their own bodies as they lose authenticity. I think when you talk about Homer avoiding looking at his hands that not only to hide the foreignness of his body, but also so he can avoid his true identity. I also think it is interesting to examine Homer’s daily routine in an almost hyper real context. As a character he has come to California to die, and his bleak lifestyle can be seen as a sort of distraction from his life, just like any other hyperreality (video games, reality tv, or social media).
Ilana, I interpreted Chapter 8 very similarly to you but your deeper analysis of it made me think more about Homer and his hands. It didn’t occur to me that Homer’s personification of his hands can exemplify spectacle. I agree, living in Hollywood, he does not fit into the categories that Tod created for the people there. Homer is still alienated like everyone else in Hollywood, but in a completely different way. His strange routines, particularly with his hands, are what alienates him the most and reveals his lack of control over his body, as you’ve mentioned. However, what I found most intriguing in your post is the fact that you connected Homer’s detachment from his body to his detachment and alienation of himself from the whole world, which didn’t even occur to me but makes absolute sense and reveals a deeper quality of Homer.
Immediately, I was drawn to Homer Simpson (not because of the coincidental name) due to his eccentric persona. I felt like he acted like a frightened animal whenever Tod greeted, which is quite peculiar for a grown man. This made me wonder why Faye liked such an awkward man. Tod "watched him for a few minutes, then called out a friendly greeting. Without replying, Homer ran away" (79) Considering the fact that the sitcom version of Homer Simpson was based upon this character, I couldn't help but wonder if Homer was retarded. He certainly seemed it; he would stare at a the back of his house for hours upon hours despite his beautiful view. What could Faye, a dazzling, beautiful aspiring actress see in such a dumb, odd man. Is Homer rich? I assumed he was because his "father had left him six thousand dollars" and he "had saved ten more" (86). Maybe Faye only pays Homer interest because he makes her feel smarter and the more confidence as a hopeful actress, the more likely it is to achieve stardom.
Rene, I found your response both thoughtful and eye-opening. While I agree that Homer Simpson has a "eccentric personality," I find your conclusion that he is retarded to be relatively untethered. I believe that West is highlighting Simpson's strange behavior to show how Simpson does not blend in with West's other Hollywood personalities, and not to make a statement about Simpson's intelligence. Simpson, in my opinion, seems to be a bit more mindful of his actions than the other characters, and is therefore less consumed in the "spectacle" which Hollywood creates. In other words, Simpson lives in a realer world. Furthermore, your assertion that Faye only pays Simpson attention because he is rich has little convincing evidence to back it up, and may contain some unintentional biases on your part.
Rene, this is a great example of yet another tie to the Spectacle that the book provides. This plays into the fact that the Spectacle glorifies people no matter what their background or human properties, only that they are famous or have money. With Homer, the audience has clearly has been blinded by presumption that since he lives in Hollywood he is successful and without flaws: "Tod examined him eagerly. He didn't mean to be rude but at first glance this man seemed an exact model for the kind of person who comes to California to die" (West 6). It is clear that despite his image Homer still has "flaws", and flaws like the people Tom describes previously>
Rene, I thought this was very interesting. I would not have thought to make this comparison even if both characters bare the same name. It seems so simple at face value but your analysis on their personas is very good and I like how you posed the question "Faye, a dazzling, beautiful aspiring actress see in such a dumb, odd man. Is Homer rich?" I thought this was very insightful.
Rene, your response was definitely interesting--I was wondering if anyone was going to make some sort of connection between Homer Simpson in the sitcom and Homer Simpson in the novel. That being said, I want to consider the assumptions you make at the end. I personally do not see anything of value in Simpson that could potentially further Faye's career. He is boring and is content with being boring, he bottles up his feelings while Faye forces herself to be desolate of feelings except in the instance of a potential lover. In chapter three it states that Faye "could only love a handsome man and would only let a wealthy man love her"(33). The way I see it, Faye does not want one without the other-- and Simpson is not particularly framed as a handsome man. He has physical flaws. Considering all of this, it still remains a mystery to me the interest in Simpson from Faye. My hope is that Tod assumes that there is another reason entirely for this interest or, at least, makes the decision not to follow in Simpson's footsteps if the goal is to be with Faye.
In the novel, “The Day Of The Locust,” Nathanael West has decided to include the character, Mrs. Jenning. After being introduced to Mrs. Jenning in the novel, the readers have gained an understanding and an impression of who Mrs. Jenning’s really is. The description of Mrs. Jennings tells the readers about her life as an actress and reveals that, “Instead of becoming and extra or a bit player like many other old stars, she had shown excellent business sense and had opened a callhouse. She wasn’t vicious” (42). From this, a reader can gather that Mrs. Jenning is not a “typical Hollywood actress” who will take any opportunity to receive a part in an upcoming Hollywood film. In describing her as not being “vicious,” it becomes clear that her personality differs from those around her, that she works with. Furthermore, she could be described as an outcast, compared to the people that surround her, because her determination for her work is extremely serious, and she portrays a very independent and “refined” (43) character Another interesting aspect that the author decides to mention about Mrs. Jenning is that, “she permitted her girls to service only men of wealth and position, not to say last and discretion” (42). Therefore, Mrs. Jenning’s character shows that class of a person does not matter, and she seems to look at the overall outcome of a situation by looking for equal opportunity and the best decisions for her business, which she is very dedicated to. This character may serve to make a statement about the traditional lives of Hollywood citizens verses a person in Hollywood who does not conform to the traditional values of Hollywood, and takes a different approach to the lifestyle.
I agree 100% Kayla, based on the reading throughout Chapter 5 it shows Mrs. Jennings’s appreciation and dedication despite for her craving of profit (50% payout). Nathanael West describes her as cultured, handsome, persistent, and passionate about her life and what she does (occupation-wise). I really like how this is based in Hollywood, because we have not read many novels based there. Also, this can possibly help us get a better view of Hollywood, one of the main sources of the day to day consumerism that we consume almost every day. Instead, many of us just view Hollywood and many other places stereotypically and have no idea about how life is there.
The character of Homer Simpson is a very peculiar one when we first meet him. West describes him as looking like one of the people who came to California to die. As the chapter progresses we experience Homer as a social outcast who struggles to speak to others. His social awkwardness is seen when he talks to Tod, “This time Simpson didn’t move, perhaps because Tod had backed him against the tree. ‘That’s fine’ he blurtd out. ‘I was passing… I live up the street” (51). Homer’s inability to have a conversation speaks to West’s view that the more we immerse ourselves in hyperreality and simulacra the harder to connect on a human level it will become. This assertion has only become more true over time as we see today in society with how obsessed with phones people have become.
Harry, very well done analysis of the character Homer Simpson. I think that it is important that you mention that he is a character that is described as "looking" like a person who comes to California to die, because we as readers are not told yet that he actually is a character who has come to California to die. However, now as readers it may be a little bit easier to pick out the characters that purposefully come to California to die, because now we know that they have a certain look and can be defined based on appearance and judgement of a person. Homer's physical description, revealed by the author, was that he was "perfect in every detail down to fever eyes and unruly hands" (50). The symbolism of hands may serve to represent the part of the body that does the decision making and initiates what gets done. The description of his hands being described as "unruly" can tell readers that his hands may be uncontrollable and thus making a larger statement that he is an uncontrollable/uneasy character. This also adds to your point that he has a social awkwardness, and how he is distracted by the life around him and has the inability to connect on a human level. I also think that your idea about how people become to obsessed and involved with material and technological items is completely true and in many ways that distracts/prevents them from being able to have personal/human interactions.
The spectacle manifests itself as how the people of Hollywood look at themselves and the world. This is the case with Claude, who is blinded by the simulacra world Hollywood is: "Claude was a successful screen writer who lived in a big house that was an exact reproduction of the old Dupuy mansion near Biloxi, Mississippi. When Tod came up the walk between the boxwood hedges, he greeted him from the enormous, two-story porch by doing the impersonation that went with the Southern colonial architecture. He teetered back and forth on his heels like a Civil War colonel and made believe he had a large belly" (West 4). Like we had discussed in class, the house as a recreation of a design that had already been built shows how we romanticize other cultures and appropriate them into our own. Another example is that he "made believe he had a large belly" which not only plainly shows somewhat of an ego from Claude but also that he tries to distract himself through his role in a movie showing that not only are the spectators (society) fooled into thinking they are happy with consumerism but the entertainers are as well. It is also mentioned later that he uses his Chinese butler to act out a scene where he is talking to a black person in the West. This shows again cultural appropriation in America, where the Spectacle seems to blur the lines between social acceptable and not with such an outdated scenario as what Claude is acting out.
To continue on your note, I agree that materialism and consumerism is a huge commodity that West uses intentionally to add meaning to the novel. To connect with my post, we could clearly see the connection between how you mentioned the specific way "the people of Hollywood look at themselves and the world," with the family desiring Marie because it shows the particular reason as to why she is desired. West purposely only includes Marie's looks to empathize that in this simulacrum world, only materialism matters. Consumerism, as you mentioned, tags along by emphasizing the idea that everyone should buy these clothes to fit in, to feel "desired." Essentially, allowing one to cope with the harsh reality or furthermore, hide from the reality we all live in.
Jack, I think this a great point and something that might get overlooked. Claude is clearly one of those characters that will clearly be in the story but go unnoticed throughout it. These simple but clear instances of simulacra throughout the first few pages of the book really didn’t seem that big to while reading; however, what I now see is a pattern of scenes where Claude is only perpetuating this idea of the spectacle. It would be interesting to see what else we see from Claude considering he has become so interesting so quickly. In my opinion, Claude will be a very fun character to analyze.
When taking into consideration the movie, "LE PREDICAMENT DE MARIE ou LA BONNE DISTRAITE," the family's interaction with Marie, portrays the dehumanization of authentic love for the characters in the novel. West intentionally sets up the movie to idolize Marie, making it "evident that the whole family desired Marie"(45). In addition, while Marie is characterized, West mentions that she is "a young girl in a tight-fitting black uniform with very short skirts"(44). Therefore, the family truly only desire way Marie looks because her internal characteristics weren't included in the novel, as where her clothes were. Essentially, this could also hint that societal expectations or materialism prevents one from seeking authentic love. Therefore, showing how in general, the characters in the book would relate to the theme of artificial love since the author specifically includes this particular movie scene.
Parminder, this is really interesting analysis! I was also drawn to this scene and its connection to the concept of spectacle. I think that that your interpretation that her being valued simply for her looks comes in the way of her ability to find “authentic love” is spot on. Not only do I think that this scene reflects artificial love, but it also illustrates the casualness and insignificance of sex in Hollywood. This scene lacks emotional intimacy and portrays Marie as a hot commodity that is up for sale. Nathanael West effectively critiques the nonchalant nature of sex in Hollywood through this movie scene.
I also agree and saw this the same way you did, Parminder. This lack of authenticity when it comes to love and almost this shallowness I felt was very present. I felt as if it fit in well with what Hollywood advertises, and how it romanticizes everything, especially looks, and it's almost degrading to her to the point that she cannot find real love. Not only that, it really doesn't allow her to have emotional connections with anyone and I do think she suffers from this. This scene goes hand in hand with what I believe is the issue in Hollywood is, and all the artificial relationships that stem from it.
I really liked your analysis, Parminder. I also thought it was interesting that Marie was viewed only for her sex appeal, rather than her work for the family. Even more so I would argue that she becomes almost like an object. I agree that this says a lot about the world that they live in; it depicts the Hollywood life in a shallow and materialistic way like you mentioned. Additionally, I found it interesting how the entire family ended up in the room, regardless of their ages. I think this connects to how in the introduction, he said that Hollywood died when everyone became desensitized and started to do the things that people used to exclusively do there. Today, even young kids are exposed to everything because of the internet and they're taught from a young age to view women in this way.
The spectacle is most apparent it seems in correlation with the accumulation of consumer goods and the aspiration for success in life it appears. The idea of outsiders coming to Hollywood with the intentions of making money and perhaps becoming famous is referenced to. "Guys like that come out here, make a lot of money grouse all the time about the place, flop on their assignments, then go back East and tell dialect stories about producers they've never met," (38). Business men come to Hollywood with the intentions of making money, viewing the place as simply an economic opportunity worth exploiting. The fact that here the group of men are discussing this suggests that it is occurring on a mass scale, a concept that could be described as a phenomenon driven by the desire for capital. Likewise, Tod states: "It's a small valise when you leave home in the morning, cheap and with a bad handle, but by evening it's a trunk with brass corners and many foreign labels,"(41). This is symbolic of the way it seems that Tod, Claude, and others live their lives, starting with arguably little, but as life progresses they accumulate wealth and part of this wealth are these "foreign labels." This reflects the spectacle in that it appears to be the uniform goal of these men to accumulate "labels" that will be representative of their success and their wealth.
Spectacle is actively at work in Mrs. Jenning’s escort service. This can be considered spectacle because similarly, the service allows the men and women to focus on appearance, thus alienating themselves and separating themselves from their reality. Nathanael West even acknowledges the downside of her callhouse when saying, “She wasn’t vicious. Far from it. She ran her business just as other women run lending libraries, shrewdly and with taste” (42). Although on the surface it appears that he is simply saying that she is not a bad woman, I interpreted it as defensiveness, thus revealing his conscious understanding of the implications of her business. In addition to this service providing an escape from reality, it also sets the women up as a sort of commodity; he does this by comparing them to something to be borrowed at “lending libraries.”
Emma, I completely agree with your analysis of the spectacle at work with the escort service. As I wrote in my post, her taste within her service pertains to wealthy and discreet men, those within a position of power. The power of the men takes away from reality and takes focus away from their appearance physically and alters it to that of status. In a sense, it is a but ironic due to the narratives main focus on characters and their relationship with physical appearance.
Emma, this is a great point you make. I also noticed spectacle in the scene where Mrs. Schwartzen shows Tod the fake dead horse in the pool, describing its magnificence in detail, and later reveling in its compelling simulation of reality: "Its hammerhead lay twisted to one side and from its mouth, which was set in an agonized grin, hung a heavy, black tongue. / 'Isn't it marvelous!' exclaimed Mrs. Schwartzen" (39). Allowing the horse's grandeur to sink in, she later brags of its cost, revealing the value added to any commodity once it has a price tag, rather than appreciating the labor that went into it or the meaning it portrays. In doing this, she detaches herself from the idea of brutal death that the horse embodies, allowing this commodity to pull her out of reality. Her excitement over the horse is attributed to the power the simulated death of such an enormous creature gives her, as well.
In tonight's reading of "Day Of The Locust," the idea of spectacle was most clear when the screening of "LE PREDICAMENT DE MARIE ou LA BONNE DISTRAITE" was interrupted by technical difficulties. The "spectacle" theory, which Guy DeBord discusses in his "Society of the Spectacle" refers to the ways in which society distracts and pacifies the masses with consumerist goods. In this situation, the screening acts as the audience's pacifier; this is directly proven in the audience's tone before the movie starts and after it is interrupted. For example, before the screening, the audience says things like "Get a move on, slow poke" and "What's your hurry? Here's your hat" (74), demonstrating the audience's need for entertainment, for some sort of interruption of authentic life that will eliminate the need for human-to-human interaction. When the screening is interrupted, the tearing of eyes previously glued to a screen to the humans around them results in shock and confusion - someone yells "it's a frame-up!" while others call the experience a "fake...cheat...[and] old teaser routine" (75). Clearly, the people do not wish to exist in real life, and would rather conform and lazily gaze into society's pacifier, or, as Marx writes, "opiate."
In Nathanael West’s “The Day of the Locust,” Homer Simpson is a very interesting character. One of the most peculiar things about Homer is the fact that he appears to be detached from his body parts, and he seems to have a different “relationship” with each part of his body. His relationship with his hands in particular caught my attention. Homer treats his hands as if they do not belong to him, personifying them as if they are a completely different creature that he unwillingly has to take care of. On page 56, Homer wakes up in the morning but says that “every part of his body was awake” but his hands “still slept.” He continues to mention that his hands “demanded special attention, had always demanded it” (56). Furthermore, Homer reveals that, as a child, he used to “stick pins into them and once had even thrust them into a fire,” but now he just uses cold water (56). These encounters that Homer has with his hands seem to be like he is dealing with a wild creature that he is trying to tame, rather than his own body part, making Homer a very peculiar character in “The Day of the Locust”.
What impressions or comparisons do you make about characters so far?
In the novel THE DAY OF THE LOCUST by Nathanael West, Homer is the most attracting and interesting character to me. He seems to be a person who can very easily settle in and blend in with groups and places no matter who or where. For example, “It took Homer only a few minutes to get settled in his new home.” (55) I would think a person who has a new home would check out the house or apartment and see if everything is functional and if all the mechanics are fine. On the other hand, he just drops his stuff off and lays in bed not having much care about it.
In the book "Day of the Locust" Tod reminds me of Jack from "White Noise" in some ways. I made this comparison because from the beginning I saw that Tod likes to be very descriptive just like Jack was. "Yet, despite his appearance, he was really a very complicated young man with a whole set of personalities, one inside the other like a nest of Chinese boxes". This quote for example from Chapter one shows this accurately because this is an example of how Todd likes to over analyze certain situations. I will keep looking and see if in any ways Todd is similar to Jack.
I completely agree with this comparison, and to take it a step forward I would also said that both Tod and Jack continuously try to understand the world they live in. As a modernist in a post modern society, Jack often turned to Murray to help explain why things work the way they do. He also often engaged in arguments with his son over small technicalities, such as whether it was raining or not. Jack couldn't keep up in a world that every thing was questioned, and so he often tried to understand it. Similarly, Tod's lust for Faye Greener and his passive explanation of what she told him about only loving and receiving love from "wealthy" and "rich" men goes to show that he is struggling to understand the Hollywood-based world he lives in.
My first impression on Faye Greener is that she has been completely absorbed into the “typical” view of Hollywood; It is all about money, appearance, and fame. As Tod describes his conversation with Faye, he remembers that she said she “‘could only love a handsome man and would only let a wealthy man love her’” (33). Through this, Faye conforms to the ways of the simulacra that she lives in. Hollywood is all about sellouts, and as Tod reminds us in the beginning with the construction of different houses, it is also all about appearances (considering all these houses are fundamentally built from the same thing). Faye, unlike Tod, accepts these values and decides to implement them in her own life. This, I believe, is an example of one losing their individuality and becoming like everyone else. Tod is very different because he decides to focus his paintings on “people of a different type” (23). Thus, unlike his fellow counterparts, Tod does not want to focus on mainstream, wealthy, and visually appealing people. But rather focus on those who might be overlooked.
I completely agree with you Jason, out of all the character we have met in the novel so far Faye Greener has been the one who fits into the Hollywood stereotype. I also find interesting how for some reason Tod is so interested in her. I mean he's the complete opposite of her and you would think he would like someone who is more like him. The whole idea of hi becoming so obsessed with Faye is also an example of spectacle at work, although he realizes that she implement Hollywood values into her life whereas he doesn't he continues to go after her. The fact that the reason why he wouldn't have a chance is because "He couldn't further her carer" (35) reveals a lot of Hollywood lifestyle, one prefers to be with someone who will grantee them more success.
Although Tod is consumed by spectacle living in Hollywood, he seems to crave transcendence, and tries, however feebly, to do so through his art. As he discusses his admiration for Harry, Faye's father, Tod discusses the need for a catalyst: "The old man was a clown and Tod had all the painter's usual love of clowns. But what was more important, he felt that his clownship was a clue to the people who stared (a painter's clue, that is--a clue in the form of a symbol), just as Faye's dreams were another" (47). Tod's inner artistic narrative serves to demonstrate how he is searching for a deeper meaning to life, a symbolic and guiding force to follow. Although he is fairly submissive within the commodity-ridden reality of spectacle and simulacra, Tod's work with art reveals his inner desire to seize "the day of the locusts," recognizing his individuality and responsibility to transcend the manifestations of capitalism around him.
Homer is an extremely peculiar character in the sense that he does not fit the Hollywood stereotype. What makes this harder to grasp is the fact that Tod originally believed Homer was one of those people who came to California to die. Tod is completely wrong and he later realizes it. Homer is not like any character in the book. This is why Tod relentlessly tries to pursue him. He’s different, Tod is unable to categorize him: “Tod saw that he was mistaken. Homer Simpson was physically the type” (51). Because of this new class of people in California Tod is forced to search for answers. The only way to do this is stalking him which is what Tod ultimately ends up doing.
Very interesting interpretation you have here Nick. I have to say that I agree that Tod tried to categorize Homer based on his appearance, but quickly realized he had been mistaken while speaking with Homer. The whole notion behind Homer being shy reflects the opposite of those who live in Hollywood. According to the narrator those who typically live in Hollywood are looking for opportunities and are looking out to be wealthy. On the hand Homer seem to represent opposite characteristics. What I am wondering is what role Homer will play as the novel continuous or if that will be his only appearance?
In “The Day of the Locust”, by Nathanael West, spectacles seem to be most evident among the wealthy and those of higher positions. In Claude Estee’s party, a spectacle is actively at work as seen through the dead horse made out of rubber: “’Isn’t it marvelous!’ exclaimed Mrs. Schwartzen, clapping her hands… It’s rubber, of course. It cost lots of money.’ ‘But why?’ ‘To amuse.’”(39). Mrs. Schwartzen, a tennis champion, finds amusement in the dead horse in a pool. The fact that she has developed such a high interest for a dead horse and describes it as “marvelous” reflects the spectacle that can be caused by consumerism. This dead horse is made out of “rubber” yet when Mrs. Schwartzen is questioned about the horse’s purpose she mainly states that it is “to amuse.” Mrs. Schwartzen is a tennis champion and therefore wealthy and at a high position, yet she seems to be most affected by this spectacle unlike Tod who lacks interest for the dead horse. The spectacle itself seems to trap those who are wealthier which can also be seen later on with Mrs. Jenning’s business.
I think the introduction of Mrs. Jennings as a character, shows this alternate side of what Hollywood is. She's almost used as a parallel to show the good side of Hollywood, and that not everyone is as bad as they are made out to be. For example, when she is referred to as "she wasn't vicious" (44) it shows that she had other ways of doing things that maybe not all Hollywood actresses had. This is important to note, especially in a time where Hollywood was so active and people were so keen on landing big roles, there were still these "authentic" people that would do things without profiting off the backs of others. Thus, my first impression of Mrs. Jennings is either somewhat of a foil character to bring out the traits in other characters by highlighting her authenticity, or to show there are two kinds of people in Hollywood. This was not only rare in general, but the fact that she's a woman who has a significant role in Hollywood is something to keep track of.
In tonight's reading of "Day Of The Locust,” I find Homer Simpson a very interesting character. Besides the fact that Homer seems to be different from all the other character what I find particularly interesting is his hands, although it’s just another part of his body he gives his hand more attention due to its size. Homer treats his hands as if it has a mind of it’s own, When Homer wakes up in the morning he says that “every part of his body was awake… except for his hands” (p.56) this makes him a peculiar character in the sense that rather than viewing his hands as another part of the body, instead he sees it more as an animal that has been trying to control for many year. Earlier in the chapter he reveal that as a child he use to “stick pins into [his hands] and once has even thrust them into fire”(56). Additionally due to his large hands you can immediately tell that he does not fit into the Hollywood stereotype which is why he probably focuses so much on his hands.
Cristal, this is a very interesting topic that you are bringing up here about Homer Simpson's treatment of his hands. You say that he gives more attention to his hands, particularly due to their size, so one could say that this connects to the idea of a spectacle. It might be a stretch but one can say that his hands are like a distraction to him, especially because of the amount of references made to them, and that once he begins to view his hands differently, their meaning changes, which would be an example of simulacra. Lastly, I like your comment about his hands not fitting into the Hollywood stereotype and agree with your statements.
I thought that Claude's exchange with Tod was very interesting. When Tod mentions "tombstones, vending machines" and other things that he thought were depressing, Claude comforts him in a strange way (West, 41). He related vending machines to love because, to him, they were both transactional. Love can be inexpensive, easy to find, and most importantly, disposable. You simply can "insert a coin and press home the lever" to choose a "brand" of love (West, 41). I thought that this also related to what Faye previously said about how she could only love a handsome man and she would only let wealthy men love her. Everyone seems to have requirements for the type of love they're seeking, which is ironic because they aren't searching for real relationships anyways. This plays into the idea of people in Hollywood putting up a facade in order to attain their, usually, impossible goals.
Great and interesting argument. Another thing that was interesting about the vending machine metaphor was its simplicity. Humans tend to oversimplify things that they cannot understand. Hence, Claude's argument said more about him and his relationship, or lack of a true relationship, than it did about his views on love. Again ironic as his facade exposed him in different ways.
I find it very interesting how we were able to get different understandings from the same quote, regarding the vending machines. It is though provoking how you took the view of love being "inexpensive, easy to find, and disposable". This idea of quick love that does not really have any value seems to relate to the earlier explanations of how movies are created; only once in a while a big blockbuster is created, otherwise only small B grade movies are released to appease the masses, basically. I connect this back to your description of love because it is something that is disposable, that is done quickly just for the sake of doing it, in an attempt to find some sort of pleasure that is not made to last. Although, once in a while actual love is found, which is the blockbuster, it is very rare and takes a lot of effort and money, which is why people stick with temporary happiness.
As we began to discuss in class today, a spectacle distracts the masses and reduces reality into an endless supply of commodifiable fragments while encouraging us to focus on appearances. One example of a spectacle that I have come across in the novel is when Tod is examining Homer. "At first glance, this man seemed an exact model for the kind of person who comes to California to die, perfect in every detail down to fever eyes and unruly hands" (page 50). This is an example of a spectacle because Tod is letting his interpretation of Homer's appearance affect the way that he is thinking and makes him lead to conclusions.He later says "that he was mistaken. Homer Simpson was only physically the type"(page 51).
Although we have only read a small amount of the book, there has been constant detailed description of what people look like: their clothes, face, etc. When Tod meets Homer Simpson, his first reaction was that “this seemed an exact model for the kind of person who comes to California to die” (50). He gives his own reasons as to why he believes this, but truly it is linked to Tod’s insecurities. Tod knows that he does not have much of a chance with Faye, so he must attack Homer immediately, to make himself feel better. At the beginning of the book the narrator says that the scout “probably wouldn’t have sent him to Hollywood… His large sprawling body, his slow blue eyes and sloppy grin” (22). Hollywood has become more about looks than talent, which is not something Tod can keep up with. To cope with that, he targets those who can function in this society as “people who come to California to die”.
Lilith brings up a really important topic thus far in the novel in that people's shallowness driven by superficiality creates this new mindset where labels matter most. The fear of being replaced, therefore, constantly comparing oneself to another is highly prevalent in Tod where he projects his insecurities for self reassurance for Faye: "Perfect in every detail down to fever eyes and unruly hands" (50). The simple act of diminishing a person then result to having a single expectation, leading to conformity. Like I said in my response, California is a home for capitalism and entering this environment removes the humanity of some people with the competitive drive and over comparison of others resulting in negativity. In this quote said by Tod, like capitalism and spectacles, Homer is diminished or categorized into appearance expectations to lower ones success.
Spectacles are at work so far in the novel thus far with individuals succumbing to conformity due to the distorting environment that is Hollywood. These “sellouts” enter the city in hopes of self reinvention when in actuality they are diminishing themselves even more. People wishing to live the glamourous life result in creating a façade; making up an alter ego for the approval of others. Tod, socializing with these people, is able to detect these lies in which he mentally calls them out (Does this make him more authentic?): "Guys like that come out here, make a lot of money grouse all the time about the place, flop on their assignments, then go back East and tell dialect stories about producers they've never met" (38). Spectacle plays a role here because Hollywood is the city of commercials and movies in which it is alive by being advertised to the public. Criticizing on this shines light on how the discussion along with many other events are encouraged by the capitalism forced to people driving them to ruin their lives for money or reducing everyone to how much they are worth by superficiality. In addition, the scene with Claude and him at his house continues with this spectacles theme because Claude acts out a scenario of being a Southern gentleman to match a high class person with their horses and mansions. Through this role play Claude demonstrates racist notions with references such as “you black rascal” portrays a disturbing image of a dead horse; this is driven by the class system in which capitalism bleeds through this act. We are able to see this recurring theme or act in which the idea of labeling is highly significant in which the label one gets is more important than one’s original self. Simulacra?
In this reading we are introduced to Claude, a “successful screenwriter” (36), who already seems to follow along with some of the themes that have arisen in these early chapters. In his initial description it is explained how he was doing an impersonation of “a civil war colonel and made believe he had a large belly. He had no belly at all”(36). Already, there is a juxtaposition between what Claude attempts to portray himself as, and the reality of who he is; this idea of acting like something that you are not is very common in Hollywood, a world of simulacra and pastiche. Later on Claude explains what love is: “[it’s] like a vending machine… insert a coin and press home the lever” (41). This simple and detached definition of love depicts the lack of love in Claude’s life, and rather the consumerist version of fast love, otherwise known as prostitution. Claude is unable to attain a meaningful relationship from which to understand the meaning of love, and even in the type of situation that he refers to as love he cannot reach happiness: “Frown at yourself in the dirty river” (41). This once again relates back to the common thread so far depicted in the novel of sex.
The connections between the characters of this novel and The Great Gatsby seem endless. Generally, the wealth that the characters possess generate a superficiality which they attempt to hide through social gatherings in hopes of achieving authentic connection with other people. In The Great Gatsby, we can see this with Nick and his inability to relate to the people at Gatsby's party. Similarly for Tod in The Day of the Locust, Mrs. Schwartzen attempts to engage him in her social culture but fails to impress him with a fake dead horse in a pool: “ you weren’t fooled? How Impolite!...It cost lots of money” (39). Mrs. Schwartzen is unable to understand why Tod does not find the horse interesting because she, unlike himself, represents a typical Hollywood character. She feels the need to point out that “it cost lots of money” under the assumption that it would impress Tod. However, it serves to reinforce her superficiality while further alienating Tod who is not too wealthy himself. In addition, the dead horse--essentially a prop--symbolizes this world of actors who professionally put on facades in attempts to connect to an audience. This is a case of spectacle, a failure in authentic connection.
Spectacle is at work within Mrs. Jenning's service as she places the work of the employed girls and their clientele solely based upon appearance. The services of the girls to “only men of wealth and position, not to say taste and discretion” rather than being frowned upon is praised within the narrative as though Mrs. Jenning is providing a positive business and outlook for the girls (42). Additionally, Mrs. Jenning’s reasoning that “the girl wasn’t available” to Tod portrays the use of spectacle within society by showing that Mrs. Jenning and previous reactions to Tod’s physical appearance heavily impact his life in California and will continue to do so.
ReplyDeleteAbby, you make a really interesting point about the way Ms. Jennings judges clientele based upon their physical appearances, contributing to the spectacle of society in The Day of the Locust. Through Ms. Jenning, West inverts the roles of a traditional prostitution agency, empowering prostitutes as high-class, selective workers who control men vying for their services. This connects to Tom’s idea of people who come to California to die; being rejected by this high-class sex agency is West’s absurdist representation of glamorous society rejecting those whose images differ from that of the traditional Hollywood hotshot. All interactions are reduced to a surface-level exchange of goods in which only those who can sell themselves thrive, turning people into commodities. For instance, Faye becomes as unattainable for Tom as a life on-screen. She embodies the exclusivity of Hollywood, a space reserved for the wealthy and attractive. Through Faye, West comments on the way surface level appeal--sex appeal or movie appeal--erodes a desire for human relationships, making people believe that they must take physical action to connect with others and prove their worth when, in reality, they only distance themselves further from a sense of authenticity, perpetuating the spectacle of society.
DeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteHomer’s personification of his hands exemplifies spectacle in The Day of the Locust. The simple of act of washing his hands in the sink basin becomes an arduous task for Homer: “[His hands] lay quietly on the bottom like a pair of strange aquatic animals. When they were thoroughly chilled and began to crawl about, he lifted them out and hid them in a towel” (56). Depicting his hands as “aquatic animals” not only implies Homer’s lack of control over his body, but also illustrates how people can become estranged from themselves as they become less authentic. For Homer, fast-paced, glamorous life is not so much what alienates him, but rather, routine does. Through Homer, West shows that a stagnant lifestyle can be just as devoid of meaning as a shallow, action-packed one. Homer hides from the sight of his own hands because he does not want to recognize the foreignness of his own body--the way in which he has detached himself from the world around him. His bubbled life conforms to the spectacle of society in a unique way; Homer is the prime example of a blue-collar drone, a cog in the machine, conducting the same work each day as one part of a larger, capitalist system without question.
ReplyDeleteI thought this was a really well thought out response and I especially like how you described Homer as a "blue-collar drone, a cog in the machine, conducting the same work each day as one part of a larger, capitalist system." However, I wonder how much we can make this assumption because we frankly do not know much about Homer yet other than the fact that he used to work in a hotel. When Homer had to soak his hands to restore feelings of hands, I thought of Homer's sense of touch. He seems to be slow in the mind and now even his body mirrors his brain. Could this be an effect of the draining Hollywood lifestyle? Or is it the draining effects of being a chess piece of a capitalist game board? It's also odd to me that Homer soaks his hands to almost clean the inside, not the outside as most people aim to do when washing their hands. But overall amazing job, Ilana.
DeleteIlana, I think your analysis is very interesting and it discusses ideas that I had not thought about while reading chapter 8. I agree with your idea about how people can become further separated from themselves and their own bodies as they lose authenticity. I think when you talk about Homer avoiding looking at his hands that not only to hide the foreignness of his body, but also so he can avoid his true identity. I also think it is interesting to examine Homer’s daily routine in an almost hyper real context. As a character he has come to California to die, and his bleak lifestyle can be seen as a sort of distraction from his life, just like any other hyperreality (video games, reality tv, or social media).
DeleteIlana, I interpreted Chapter 8 very similarly to you but your deeper analysis of it made me think more about Homer and his hands. It didn’t occur to me that Homer’s personification of his hands can exemplify spectacle. I agree, living in Hollywood, he does not fit into the categories that Tod created for the people there. Homer is still alienated like everyone else in Hollywood, but in a completely different way. His strange routines, particularly with his hands, are what alienates him the most and reveals his lack of control over his body, as you’ve mentioned. However, what I found most intriguing in your post is the fact that you connected Homer’s detachment from his body to his detachment and alienation of himself from the whole world, which didn’t even occur to me but makes absolute sense and reveals a deeper quality of Homer.
DeleteImmediately, I was drawn to Homer Simpson (not because of the coincidental name) due to his eccentric persona. I felt like he acted like a frightened animal whenever Tod greeted, which is quite peculiar for a grown man. This made me wonder why Faye liked such an awkward man. Tod "watched him for a few minutes, then called out a friendly greeting. Without replying, Homer ran away" (79) Considering the fact that the sitcom version of Homer Simpson was based upon this character, I couldn't help but wonder if Homer was retarded. He certainly seemed it; he would stare at a the back of his house for hours upon hours despite his beautiful view. What could Faye, a dazzling, beautiful aspiring actress see in such a dumb, odd man. Is Homer rich? I assumed he was because his "father had left him six thousand dollars" and he "had saved ten more" (86). Maybe Faye only pays Homer interest because he makes her feel smarter and the more confidence as a hopeful actress, the more likely it is to achieve stardom.
ReplyDeleteRene, I found your response both thoughtful and eye-opening. While I agree that Homer Simpson has a "eccentric personality," I find your conclusion that he is retarded to be relatively untethered. I believe that West is highlighting Simpson's strange behavior to show how Simpson does not blend in with West's other Hollywood personalities, and not to make a statement about Simpson's intelligence. Simpson, in my opinion, seems to be a bit more mindful of his actions than the other characters, and is therefore less consumed in the "spectacle" which Hollywood creates. In other words, Simpson lives in a realer world. Furthermore, your assertion that Faye only pays Simpson attention because he is rich has little convincing evidence to back it up, and may contain some unintentional biases on your part.
DeleteRene, this is a great example of yet another tie to the Spectacle that the book provides. This plays into the fact that the Spectacle glorifies people no matter what their background or human properties, only that they are famous or have money. With Homer, the audience has clearly has been blinded by presumption that since he lives in Hollywood he is successful and without flaws: "Tod examined him eagerly. He didn't mean to be rude but at first glance this man seemed an exact model for the kind of person who comes to California to die" (West 6). It is clear that despite his image Homer still has "flaws", and flaws like the people Tom describes previously>
DeleteRene, I thought this was very interesting. I would not have thought to make this comparison even if both characters bare the same name. It seems so simple at face value but your analysis on their personas is very good and I like how you posed the question "Faye, a dazzling, beautiful aspiring actress see in such a dumb, odd man. Is Homer rich?" I thought this was very insightful.
DeleteRene, your response was definitely interesting--I was wondering if anyone was going to make some sort of connection between Homer Simpson in the sitcom and Homer Simpson in the novel. That being said, I want to consider the assumptions you make at the end. I personally do not see anything of value in Simpson that could potentially further Faye's career. He is boring and is content with being boring, he bottles up his feelings while Faye forces herself to be desolate of feelings except in the instance of a potential lover. In chapter three it states that Faye "could only love a handsome man and would only let a wealthy man love her"(33). The way I see it, Faye does not want one without the other-- and Simpson is not particularly framed as a handsome man. He has physical flaws. Considering all of this, it still remains a mystery to me the interest in Simpson from Faye. My hope is that Tod assumes that there is another reason entirely for this interest or, at least, makes the decision not to follow in Simpson's footsteps if the goal is to be with Faye.
DeleteIn the novel, “The Day Of The Locust,” Nathanael West has decided to include the character, Mrs. Jenning. After being introduced to Mrs. Jenning in the novel, the readers have gained an understanding and an impression of who Mrs. Jenning’s really is. The description of Mrs. Jennings tells the readers about her life as an actress and reveals that, “Instead of becoming and extra or a bit player like many other old stars, she had shown excellent business sense and had opened a callhouse. She wasn’t vicious” (42). From this, a reader can gather that Mrs. Jenning is not a “typical Hollywood actress” who will take any opportunity to receive a part in an upcoming Hollywood film. In describing her as not being “vicious,” it becomes clear that her personality differs from those around her, that she works with. Furthermore, she could be described as an outcast, compared to the people that surround her, because her determination for her work is extremely serious, and she portrays a very independent and “refined” (43) character Another interesting aspect that the author decides to mention about Mrs. Jenning is that, “she permitted her girls to service only men of wealth and position, not to say last and discretion” (42). Therefore, Mrs. Jenning’s character shows that class of a person does not matter, and she seems to look at the overall outcome of a situation by looking for equal opportunity and the best decisions for her business, which she is very dedicated to. This character may serve to make a statement about the traditional lives of Hollywood citizens verses a person in Hollywood who does not conform to the traditional values of Hollywood, and takes a different approach to the lifestyle.
ReplyDeleteI agree 100% Kayla, based on the reading throughout Chapter 5 it shows Mrs. Jennings’s appreciation and dedication despite for her craving of profit (50% payout). Nathanael West describes her as cultured, handsome, persistent, and passionate about her life and what she does (occupation-wise). I really like how this is based in Hollywood, because we have not read many novels based there. Also, this can possibly help us get a better view of Hollywood, one of the main sources of the day to day consumerism that we consume almost every day. Instead, many of us just view Hollywood and many other places stereotypically and have no idea about how life is there.
DeleteThe character of Homer Simpson is a very peculiar one when we first meet him. West describes him as looking like one of the people who came to California to die. As the chapter progresses we experience Homer as a social outcast who struggles to speak to others. His social awkwardness is seen when he talks to Tod, “This time Simpson didn’t move, perhaps because Tod had backed him against the tree. ‘That’s fine’ he blurtd out. ‘I was passing… I live up the street” (51). Homer’s inability to have a conversation speaks to West’s view that the more we immerse ourselves in hyperreality and simulacra the harder to connect on a human level it will become. This assertion has only become more true over time as we see today in society with how obsessed with phones people have become.
ReplyDeleteHarry, very well done analysis of the character Homer Simpson. I think that it is important that you mention that he is a character that is described as "looking" like a person who comes to California to die, because we as readers are not told yet that he actually is a character who has come to California to die. However, now as readers it may be a little bit easier to pick out the characters that purposefully come to California to die, because now we know that they have a certain look and can be defined based on appearance and judgement of a person. Homer's physical description, revealed by the author, was that he was "perfect in every detail down to fever eyes and unruly hands" (50). The symbolism of hands may serve to represent the part of the body that does the decision making and initiates what gets done. The description of his hands being described as "unruly" can tell readers that his hands may be uncontrollable and thus making a larger statement that he is an uncontrollable/uneasy character. This also adds to your point that he has a social awkwardness, and how he is distracted by the life around him and has the inability to connect on a human level. I also think that your idea about how people become to obsessed and involved with material and technological items is completely true and in many ways that distracts/prevents them from being able to have personal/human interactions.
DeleteThe spectacle manifests itself as how the people of Hollywood look at themselves and the world. This is the case with Claude, who is blinded by the simulacra world Hollywood is: "Claude was a successful screen writer who lived in a big house that was
ReplyDeletean exact reproduction of the old Dupuy mansion near Biloxi, Mississippi. When Tod came up the walk between the boxwood hedges, he greeted him from the enormous, two-story porch by doing the impersonation that went with the Southern colonial architecture. He teetered back and forth on his heels like a Civil War colonel and made believe he had a large belly" (West 4). Like we had discussed in class, the house as a recreation of a design that had already been built shows how we romanticize other cultures and appropriate them into our own. Another example is that he "made believe he had a large belly" which not only plainly shows somewhat of an ego from Claude but also that he tries to distract himself through his role in a movie showing that not only are the spectators (society) fooled into thinking they are happy with consumerism but the entertainers are as well. It is also mentioned later that he uses his Chinese butler to act out a scene where he is talking to a black person in the West. This shows again cultural appropriation in America, where the Spectacle seems to blur the lines between social acceptable and not with such an outdated scenario as what Claude is acting out.
To continue on your note, I agree that materialism and consumerism is a huge commodity that West uses intentionally to add meaning to the novel. To connect with my post, we could clearly see the connection between how you mentioned the specific way "the people of Hollywood look at themselves and the world," with the family desiring Marie because it shows the particular reason as to why she is desired. West purposely only includes Marie's looks to empathize that in this simulacrum world, only materialism matters. Consumerism, as you mentioned, tags along by emphasizing the idea that everyone should buy these clothes to fit in, to feel "desired." Essentially, allowing one to cope with the harsh reality or furthermore, hide from the reality we all live in.
DeleteJack, I think this a great point and something that might get overlooked. Claude is clearly one of those characters that will clearly be in the story but go unnoticed throughout it. These simple but clear instances of simulacra throughout the first few pages of the book really didn’t seem that big to while reading; however, what I now see is a pattern of scenes where Claude is only perpetuating this idea of the spectacle. It would be interesting to see what else we see from Claude considering he has become so interesting so quickly. In my opinion, Claude will be a very fun character to analyze.
DeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteWhen taking into consideration the movie, "LE PREDICAMENT DE MARIE ou LA BONNE DISTRAITE," the family's interaction with Marie, portrays the dehumanization of authentic love for the characters in the novel. West intentionally sets up the movie to idolize Marie, making it "evident that the whole family desired Marie"(45). In addition, while Marie is characterized, West mentions that she is "a young girl in a tight-fitting black uniform with very short skirts"(44). Therefore, the family truly only desire way Marie looks because her internal characteristics weren't included in the novel, as where her clothes were. Essentially, this could also hint that societal expectations or materialism prevents one from seeking authentic love. Therefore, showing how in general, the characters in the book would relate to the theme of artificial love since the author specifically includes this particular movie scene.
ReplyDeleteParminder, this is really interesting analysis! I was also drawn to this scene and its connection to the concept of spectacle. I think that that your interpretation that her being valued simply for her looks comes in the way of her ability to find “authentic love” is spot on. Not only do I think that this scene reflects artificial love, but it also illustrates the casualness and insignificance of sex in Hollywood. This scene lacks emotional intimacy and portrays Marie as a hot commodity that is up for sale. Nathanael West effectively critiques the nonchalant nature of sex in Hollywood through this movie scene.
DeleteI also agree and saw this the same way you did, Parminder. This lack of authenticity when it comes to love and almost this shallowness I felt was very present. I felt as if it fit in well with what Hollywood advertises, and how it romanticizes everything, especially looks, and it's almost degrading to her to the point that she cannot find real love. Not only that, it really doesn't allow her to have emotional connections with anyone and I do think she suffers from this. This scene goes hand in hand with what I believe is the issue in Hollywood is, and all the artificial relationships that stem from it.
DeleteI really liked your analysis, Parminder. I also thought it was interesting that Marie was viewed only for her sex appeal, rather than her work for the family. Even more so I would argue that she becomes almost like an object. I agree that this says a lot about the world that they live in; it depicts the Hollywood life in a shallow and materialistic way like you mentioned. Additionally, I found it interesting how the entire family ended up in the room, regardless of their ages. I think this connects to how in the introduction, he said that Hollywood died when everyone became desensitized and started to do the things that people used to exclusively do there. Today, even young kids are exposed to everything because of the internet and they're taught from a young age to view women in this way.
DeleteThe spectacle is most apparent it seems in correlation with the accumulation of consumer goods and the aspiration for success in life it appears. The idea of outsiders coming to Hollywood with the intentions of making money and perhaps becoming famous is referenced to. "Guys like that come out here, make a lot of money grouse all the time about the place, flop on their assignments, then go back East and tell dialect stories about producers they've never met," (38). Business men come to Hollywood with the intentions of making money, viewing the place as simply an economic opportunity worth exploiting. The fact that here the group of men are discussing this suggests that it is occurring on a mass scale, a concept that could be described as a phenomenon driven by the desire for capital. Likewise, Tod states: "It's a small valise when you leave home in the morning, cheap and with a bad handle, but by evening it's a trunk with brass corners and many foreign labels,"(41). This is symbolic of the way it seems that Tod, Claude, and others live their lives, starting with arguably little, but as life progresses they accumulate wealth and part of this wealth are these "foreign labels." This reflects the spectacle in that it appears to be the uniform goal of these men to accumulate "labels" that will be representative of their success and their wealth.
ReplyDeleteSpectacle is actively at work in Mrs. Jenning’s escort service. This can be considered spectacle because similarly, the service allows the men and women to focus on appearance, thus alienating themselves and separating themselves from their reality. Nathanael West even acknowledges the downside of her callhouse when saying, “She wasn’t vicious. Far from it. She ran her business just as other women run lending libraries, shrewdly and with taste” (42). Although on the surface it appears that he is simply saying that she is not a bad woman, I interpreted it as defensiveness, thus revealing his conscious understanding of the implications of her business. In addition to this service providing an escape from reality, it also sets the women up as a sort of commodity; he does this by comparing them to something to be borrowed at “lending libraries.”
ReplyDeleteEmma, I completely agree with your analysis of the spectacle at work with the escort service. As I wrote in my post, her taste within her service pertains to wealthy and discreet men, those within a position of power. The power of the men takes away from reality and takes focus away from their appearance physically and alters it to that of status. In a sense, it is a but ironic due to the narratives main focus on characters and their relationship with physical appearance.
DeleteEmma, this is a great point you make. I also noticed spectacle in the scene where Mrs. Schwartzen shows Tod the fake dead horse in the pool, describing its magnificence in detail, and later reveling in its compelling simulation of reality: "Its hammerhead lay twisted to one side and from its mouth, which was set in an agonized grin, hung a heavy, black tongue. / 'Isn't it marvelous!' exclaimed Mrs. Schwartzen" (39). Allowing the horse's grandeur to sink in, she later brags of its cost, revealing the value added to any commodity once it has a price tag, rather than appreciating the labor that went into it or the meaning it portrays. In doing this, she detaches herself from the idea of brutal death that the horse embodies, allowing this commodity to pull her out of reality. Her excitement over the horse is attributed to the power the simulated death of such an enormous creature gives her, as well.
DeleteIn tonight's reading of "Day Of The Locust," the idea of spectacle was most clear when the screening of "LE PREDICAMENT DE MARIE ou LA BONNE DISTRAITE" was interrupted by technical difficulties. The "spectacle" theory, which Guy DeBord discusses in his "Society of the Spectacle" refers to the ways in which society distracts and pacifies the masses with consumerist goods. In this situation, the screening acts as the audience's pacifier; this is directly proven in the audience's tone before the movie starts and after it is interrupted. For example, before the screening, the audience says things like "Get a move on, slow poke" and "What's your hurry? Here's your hat" (74), demonstrating the audience's need for entertainment, for some sort of interruption of authentic life that will eliminate the need for human-to-human interaction. When the screening is interrupted, the tearing of eyes previously glued to a screen to the humans around them results in shock and confusion - someone yells "it's a frame-up!" while others call the experience a "fake...cheat...[and] old teaser routine" (75). Clearly, the people do not wish to exist in real life, and would rather conform and lazily gaze into society's pacifier, or, as Marx writes, "opiate."
ReplyDeleteIn Nathanael West’s “The Day of the Locust,” Homer Simpson is a very interesting character. One of the most peculiar things about Homer is the fact that he appears to be detached from his body parts, and he seems to have a different “relationship” with each part of his body. His relationship with his hands in particular caught my attention. Homer treats his hands as if they do not belong to him, personifying them as if they are a completely different creature that he unwillingly has to take care of. On page 56, Homer wakes up in the morning but says that “every part of his body was awake” but his hands “still slept.” He continues to mention that his hands “demanded special attention, had always demanded it” (56). Furthermore, Homer reveals that, as a child, he used to “stick pins into them and once had even thrust them into a fire,” but now he just uses cold water (56). These encounters that Homer has with his hands seem to be like he is dealing with a wild creature that he is trying to tame, rather than his own body part, making Homer a very peculiar character in “The Day of the Locust”.
ReplyDeleteWhat impressions or comparisons do you make about characters so far?
ReplyDeleteIn the novel THE DAY OF THE LOCUST by Nathanael West, Homer is the most attracting and interesting character to me. He seems to be a person who can very easily settle in and blend in with groups and places no matter who or where. For example, “It took Homer only a few minutes to get settled in his new home.” (55) I would think a person who has a new home would check out the house or apartment and see if everything is functional and if all the mechanics are fine. On the other hand, he just drops his stuff off and lays in bed not having much care about it.
Adam Amraoui
In the book "Day of the Locust" Tod reminds me of Jack from "White Noise" in some ways. I made this comparison because from the beginning I saw that Tod likes to be very descriptive just like Jack was. "Yet, despite his appearance, he was really a very complicated young man with a whole set of personalities, one inside the other like a nest of Chinese boxes". This quote for example from Chapter one shows this accurately because this is an example of how Todd likes to over analyze certain situations. I will keep looking and see if in any ways Todd is similar to Jack.
ReplyDeleteI completely agree with this comparison, and to take it a step forward I would also said that both Tod and Jack continuously try to understand the world they live in. As a modernist in a post modern society, Jack often turned to Murray to help explain why things work the way they do. He also often engaged in arguments with his son over small technicalities, such as whether it was raining or not. Jack couldn't keep up in a world that every thing was questioned, and so he often tried to understand it. Similarly, Tod's lust for Faye Greener and his passive explanation of what she told him about only loving and receiving love from "wealthy" and "rich" men goes to show that he is struggling to understand the Hollywood-based world he lives in.
DeleteMy first impression on Faye Greener is that she has been completely absorbed into the “typical” view of Hollywood; It is all about money, appearance, and fame. As Tod describes his conversation with Faye, he remembers that she said she “‘could only love a handsome man and would only let a wealthy man love her’” (33). Through this, Faye conforms to the ways of the simulacra that she lives in. Hollywood is all about sellouts, and as Tod reminds us in the beginning with the construction of different houses, it is also all about appearances (considering all these houses are fundamentally built from the same thing). Faye, unlike Tod, accepts these values and decides to implement them in her own life. This, I believe, is an example of one losing their individuality and becoming like everyone else. Tod is very different because he decides to focus his paintings on “people of a different type” (23). Thus, unlike his fellow counterparts, Tod does not want to focus on mainstream, wealthy, and visually appealing people. But rather focus on those who might be overlooked.
ReplyDeleteI completely agree with you Jason, out of all the character we have met in the novel so far Faye Greener has been the one who fits into the Hollywood stereotype. I also find interesting how for some reason Tod is so interested in her. I mean he's the complete opposite of her and you would think he would like someone who is more like him. The whole idea of hi becoming so obsessed with Faye is also an example of spectacle at work, although he realizes that she implement Hollywood values into her life whereas he doesn't he continues to go after her. The fact that the reason why he wouldn't have a chance is because "He couldn't further her carer" (35) reveals a lot of Hollywood lifestyle, one prefers to be with someone who will grantee them more success.
DeleteAlthough Tod is consumed by spectacle living in Hollywood, he seems to crave transcendence, and tries, however feebly, to do so through his art. As he discusses his admiration for Harry, Faye's father, Tod discusses the need for a catalyst: "The old man was a clown and Tod had all the painter's usual love of clowns. But what was more important, he felt that his clownship was a clue to the people who stared (a painter's clue, that is--a clue in the form of a symbol), just as Faye's dreams were another" (47). Tod's inner artistic narrative serves to demonstrate how he is searching for a deeper meaning to life, a symbolic and guiding force to follow. Although he is fairly submissive within the commodity-ridden reality of spectacle and simulacra, Tod's work with art reveals his inner desire to seize "the day of the locusts," recognizing his individuality and responsibility to transcend the manifestations of capitalism around him.
ReplyDeleteHomer is an extremely peculiar character in the sense that he does not fit the Hollywood stereotype. What makes this harder to grasp is the fact that Tod originally believed Homer was one of those people who came to California to die. Tod is completely wrong and he later realizes it. Homer is not like any character in the book. This is why Tod relentlessly tries to pursue him. He’s different, Tod is unable to categorize him: “Tod saw that he was mistaken. Homer Simpson was physically the type” (51). Because of this new class of people in California Tod is forced to search for answers. The only way to do this is stalking him which is what Tod ultimately ends up doing.
ReplyDeleteVery interesting interpretation you have here Nick. I have to say that I agree that Tod tried to categorize Homer based on his appearance, but quickly realized he had been mistaken while speaking with Homer. The whole notion behind Homer being shy reflects the opposite of those who live in Hollywood. According to the narrator those who typically live in Hollywood are looking for opportunities and are looking out to be wealthy. On the hand Homer seem to represent opposite characteristics. What I am wondering is what role Homer will play as the novel continuous or if that will be his only appearance?
DeleteIn “The Day of the Locust”, by Nathanael West, spectacles seem to be most evident among the wealthy and those of higher positions. In Claude Estee’s party, a spectacle is actively at work as seen through the dead horse made out of rubber: “’Isn’t it marvelous!’ exclaimed Mrs. Schwartzen, clapping her hands… It’s rubber, of course. It cost lots of money.’ ‘But why?’ ‘To amuse.’”(39). Mrs. Schwartzen, a tennis champion, finds amusement in the dead horse in a pool. The fact that she has developed such a high interest for a dead horse and describes it as “marvelous” reflects the spectacle that can be caused by consumerism. This dead horse is made out of “rubber” yet when Mrs. Schwartzen is questioned about the horse’s purpose she mainly states that it is “to amuse.” Mrs. Schwartzen is a tennis champion and therefore wealthy and at a high position, yet she seems to be most affected by this spectacle unlike Tod who lacks interest for the dead horse. The spectacle itself seems to trap those who are wealthier which can also be seen later on with Mrs. Jenning’s business.
ReplyDeleteI think the introduction of Mrs. Jennings as a character, shows this alternate side of what Hollywood is. She's almost used as a parallel to show the good side of Hollywood, and that not everyone is as bad as they are made out to be. For example, when she is referred to as "she wasn't vicious" (44) it shows that she had other ways of doing things that maybe not all Hollywood actresses had. This is important to note, especially in a time where Hollywood was so active and people were so keen on landing big roles, there were still these "authentic" people that would do things without profiting off the backs of others. Thus, my first impression of Mrs. Jennings is either somewhat of a foil character to bring out the traits in other characters by highlighting her authenticity, or to show there are two kinds of people in Hollywood. This was not only rare in general, but the fact that she's a woman who has a significant role in Hollywood is something to keep track of.
ReplyDelete
ReplyDeleteIn tonight's reading of "Day Of The Locust,” I find Homer Simpson a very interesting character. Besides the fact that Homer seems to be different from all the other character what I find particularly interesting is his hands, although it’s just another part of his body he gives his hand more attention due to its size. Homer treats his hands as if it has a mind of it’s own, When Homer wakes up in the morning he says that “every part of his body was awake… except for his hands” (p.56) this makes him a peculiar character in the sense that rather than viewing his hands as another part of the body, instead he sees it more as an animal that has been trying to control for many year. Earlier in the chapter he reveal that as a child he use to “stick pins into [his hands] and once has even thrust them into fire”(56). Additionally due to his large hands you can immediately tell that he does not fit into the Hollywood stereotype which is why he probably focuses so much on his hands.
Cristal, this is a very interesting topic that you are bringing up here about Homer Simpson's treatment of his hands. You say that he gives more attention to his hands, particularly due to their size, so one could say that this connects to the idea of a spectacle. It might be a stretch but one can say that his hands are like a distraction to him, especially because of the amount of references made to them, and that once he begins to view his hands differently, their meaning changes, which would be an example of simulacra. Lastly, I like your comment about his hands not fitting into the Hollywood stereotype and agree with your statements.
DeleteI thought that Claude's exchange with Tod was very interesting. When Tod mentions "tombstones, vending machines" and other things that he thought were depressing, Claude comforts him in a strange way (West, 41). He related vending machines to love because, to him, they were both transactional. Love can be inexpensive, easy to find, and most importantly, disposable. You simply can "insert a coin and press home the lever" to choose a "brand" of love (West, 41). I thought that this also related to what Faye previously said about how she could only love a handsome man and she would only let wealthy men love her. Everyone seems to have requirements for the type of love they're seeking, which is ironic because they aren't searching for real relationships anyways. This plays into the idea of people in Hollywood putting up a facade in order to attain their, usually, impossible goals.
ReplyDeleteGreat and interesting argument. Another thing that was interesting about the vending machine metaphor was its simplicity. Humans tend to oversimplify things that they cannot understand. Hence, Claude's argument said more about him and his relationship, or lack of a true relationship, than it did about his views on love. Again ironic as his facade exposed him in different ways.
DeleteI find it very interesting how we were able to get different understandings from the same quote, regarding the vending machines. It is though provoking how you took the view of love being "inexpensive, easy to find, and disposable". This idea of quick love that does not really have any value seems to relate to the earlier explanations of how movies are created; only once in a while a big blockbuster is created, otherwise only small B grade movies are released to appease the masses, basically. I connect this back to your description of love because it is something that is disposable, that is done quickly just for the sake of doing it, in an attempt to find some sort of pleasure that is not made to last. Although, once in a while actual love is found, which is the blockbuster, it is very rare and takes a lot of effort and money, which is why people stick with temporary happiness.
DeleteAs we began to discuss in class today, a spectacle distracts the masses and reduces reality into an endless supply of commodifiable fragments while encouraging us to focus on appearances. One example of a spectacle that I have come across in the novel is when Tod is examining Homer. "At first glance, this man seemed an exact model for the kind of person who comes to California to die, perfect in every detail down to fever eyes and unruly hands" (page 50). This is an example of a spectacle because Tod is letting his interpretation of Homer's appearance affect the way that he is thinking and makes him lead to conclusions.He later says "that he was mistaken. Homer Simpson was only physically the type"(page 51).
ReplyDeleteAlthough we have only read a small amount of the book, there has been constant detailed description of what people look like: their clothes, face, etc. When Tod meets Homer Simpson, his first reaction was that “this seemed an exact model for the kind of person who comes to California to die” (50). He gives his own reasons as to why he believes this, but truly it is linked to Tod’s insecurities. Tod knows that he does not have much of a chance with Faye, so he must attack Homer immediately, to make himself feel better. At the beginning of the book the narrator says that the scout “probably wouldn’t have sent him to Hollywood… His large sprawling body, his slow blue eyes and sloppy grin” (22). Hollywood has become more about looks than talent, which is not something Tod can keep up with. To cope with that, he targets those who can function in this society as “people who come to California to die”.
ReplyDeleteLilith brings up a really important topic thus far in the novel in that people's shallowness driven by superficiality creates this new mindset where labels matter most. The fear of being replaced, therefore, constantly comparing oneself to another is highly prevalent in Tod where he projects his insecurities for self reassurance for Faye: "Perfect in every detail down to fever eyes and unruly hands" (50). The simple act of diminishing a person then result to having a single expectation, leading to conformity. Like I said in my response, California is a home for capitalism and entering this environment removes the humanity of some people with the competitive drive and over comparison of others resulting in negativity. In this quote said by Tod, like capitalism and spectacles, Homer is diminished or categorized into appearance expectations to lower ones success.
DeleteSpectacles are at work so far in the novel thus far with individuals succumbing to conformity due to the distorting environment that is Hollywood. These “sellouts” enter the city in hopes of self reinvention when in actuality they are diminishing themselves even more. People wishing to live the glamourous life result in creating a façade; making up an alter ego for the approval of others.
ReplyDeleteTod, socializing with these people, is able to detect these lies in which he mentally calls them out (Does this make him more authentic?): "Guys like that come out here, make a lot of money grouse all the time about the place, flop on their assignments, then go back East and tell dialect stories about producers they've never met" (38). Spectacle plays a role here because Hollywood is the city of commercials and movies in which it is alive by being advertised to the public. Criticizing on this shines light on how the discussion along with many other events are encouraged by the capitalism forced to people driving them to ruin their lives for money or reducing everyone to how much they are worth by superficiality. In addition, the scene with Claude and him at his house continues with this spectacles theme because Claude acts out a scenario of being a Southern gentleman to match a high class person with their horses and mansions. Through this role play Claude demonstrates racist notions with references such as “you black rascal” portrays a disturbing image of a dead horse; this is driven by the class system in which capitalism bleeds through this act. We are able to see this recurring theme or act in which the idea of labeling is highly significant in which the label one gets is more important than one’s original self. Simulacra?
In this reading we are introduced to Claude, a “successful screenwriter” (36), who already seems to follow along with some of the themes that have arisen in these early chapters. In his initial description it is explained how he was doing an impersonation of “a civil war colonel and made believe he had a large belly. He had no belly at all”(36). Already, there is a juxtaposition between what Claude attempts to portray himself as, and the reality of who he is; this idea of acting like something that you are not is very common in Hollywood, a world of simulacra and pastiche. Later on Claude explains what love is: “[it’s] like a vending machine… insert a coin and press home the lever” (41). This simple and detached definition of love depicts the lack of love in Claude’s life, and rather the consumerist version of fast love, otherwise known as prostitution. Claude is unable to attain a meaningful relationship from which to understand the meaning of love, and even in the type of situation that he refers to as love he cannot reach happiness: “Frown at yourself in the dirty river” (41). This once again relates back to the common thread so far depicted in the novel of sex.
ReplyDeleteThe connections between the characters of this novel and The Great Gatsby seem endless. Generally, the wealth that the characters possess generate a superficiality which they attempt to hide through social gatherings in hopes of achieving authentic connection with other people. In The Great Gatsby, we can see this with Nick and his inability to relate to the people at Gatsby's party. Similarly for Tod in The Day of the Locust, Mrs. Schwartzen attempts to engage him in her social culture but fails to impress him with a fake dead horse in a pool: “ you weren’t fooled? How Impolite!...It cost lots of money” (39). Mrs. Schwartzen is unable to understand why Tod does not find the horse interesting because she, unlike himself, represents a typical Hollywood character. She feels the need to point out that “it cost lots of money” under the assumption that it would impress Tod. However, it serves to reinforce her superficiality while further alienating Tod who is not too wealthy himself. In addition, the dead horse--essentially a prop--symbolizes this world of actors who professionally put on facades in attempts to connect to an audience. This is a case of spectacle, a failure in authentic connection.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDelete