2005 • Harold Pinter • The Homecoming

The Homecoming (1965)

So I had to start somewhere as far as the first laureate is concerned. I'd been accumulating a few Nobel winning authors for a while, so i figured I'd just pick one at random and begin the beguine :o)

I thought a play might be the way to go. Ease myself into the reading of massive novels and historical tracts by starting light. Yeah, light. What was i thinking?

I chose Harold Pinter's The Homecoming, first produced on Broadway in 1967, written in 1964 and published in 1965.
This was a most baffling play. Called a masterpiece in Absurdist theater by some, i simply found it unbelievable.
Wait a second, you kind reader might be saying? But isn't Absurdism partially exactly about that? Well, i guess it turns out i don't get Absurdism... or at least not this particular example.

OK, so here's the basic set up. A house in North London, with a missing wall which some critics have taken to symbolize blah, blah, blah. Yeah, I'm not buying that particular line of thought. So onwards. 

We have Max, the 60-something patriarch, his bachelor 60-something brother Sam, and his two 20-something sons, Lenny and Joey.
Max is a retired butcher who now seems to fill up most of his time by cooking everyone's din-din, Sam's a well-respected chauffeur, Joey works in demolition during the day and moonlights as a boxer and Lenny, well Lenny is a pimp.
Ah, happy family.

Into this wondrous family unit, drop in Teddy, the prodigal son gone to America to become a Philosophy Professor and his wife Ruth. Just on their way back from Venice for a delayed honeymoon (they already have 3 sons), they pop by unannounced. Have I mentioned Teddy hasn't contacted his family for six years? But he still has a key to the house and so lets himself in  for the evening and settles in upstairs with Ruth for the night.

And then hilarity ensues.

No, not really.

I read a quote by a critic about how in this particular play, the pauses are of all importance, as well as the position of chairs and the symbolism for a demolished archway. OK, sure. But here's the thing, i read the play. I didn't watch it. So maybe if i watched a performance of it, a whole other layer of amazingness would appear.

Once Teddy and Ruth come down those stairs on the next morning, the whole thing just goes a bit wobbly. Up till then, we'd been treated to the foul-mouthed diatribes of Max directed at the rest of his family. Some of it might seem shocking, unless you've grown up in a severely dysfunctional family. But i could still buy all of it. 

But within moments of meeting the family, Teddy's wife Ruth, is being man-handled by the brothers and called a "stinking pox-ridden slut" by the father. Teddy doesn't object to his family's treatment of Ruth and even more importantly, neither does Ruth.

Although it stretches the imagination, I could understand Teddy being overwhelmed by his Alpha-dog brothers and father, and so remain passive while they practically make love to his wife on the living room floor.
But the idea that Ruth would welcome this attention and encourage it just defies any sort of believability and understanding of women.

And maybe that's the point. That it's completely ridiculous that eventually the family is talking about putting her 'on the game' (prostitution). But i guess I'm just a simple reader when it comes to certain things, and Ruth's reaction and actions just didn't ring true in any way, absurd or not.

I'll likely try to hunt down a filmed version of the play (or even better, see it in person) and if i do so, I'll update this post. For now though, i have to admit 'The Homecoming' wasn't quite for me.

P.S. For some insight into Pinter's literary and political views, go and read his Nobel Lecture. It's quite an interesting read.

Mo Yan is the 2012 Nobel Laureate in Literature!

Well, the speculation is finally over.
No Philip Roth, no Alice Munro, no Murakami, no, heavens forbid, Bob Dylan ;o)

Instead the Swedish Academy chose a Chinese writer that the Chinese government is actually proud of.
Hmm, not sure if that's a good thing or not. He seems to write mostly historical novels, so I guess those can be apolitical...i guess.

Still, will refrain from any preconceptions about him and I look forward to reading him sometime within the next Nobel year. I thought I knew for sure which of his books to read - Big Breasts and Wide Hips (teehee) - but seeing as it's 500+ pp., maybe I'll end up picking up something else. We shall see.

Now onwards to the reading!