Here, we can see one short story in which alcoholism plays significant part in its overall atmosphere: “Babylon Revisited” by F. Scott Fitzgerald. In this story, a man named Charlie, who was victimized by alcoholism about two years before, now returns to Paris a seemingly changed man. However, meticulously observing this story, we will find that it is irrefutable that the problem with alcoholism he himself believed all but behind him is in fact still unresolved before him.
Various kinds of arguments warranting the idea that Charlie’s rehabilitation of alcoholism is nothing less than pretention can be probably best summed up by the word “pendulum” (Fitzgerald, 221). Obliged to truly rehabilitate himself in order to regain custody of his daughter Horonia, but at the same time nostalgically detained by the enthralling temptation of past hedonistic days, Charlie invariably oscillates between two opposite worlds, past and present, Paris and America, etc. Actually, it is typical of a person who has returned home after a long absence that he now finds himself being at a loss about his identity (Male, 91); probably Charlie, who has come back to Paris after a year and a half, is also confused about in what way he can identify himself most properly, and even what he wishes to do in Paris at his heart. Closely analysing Charlie’s vacillation in this story, we will discover his subconscious desire in favour of deriving his past wicked ambiance running through Paris.
Firstly, for example, it is true that Charlie willingly displays himself as a “reformed sinner” (Fitzgerald, 214) by demonstrating his deep love for Horonia, but we must not overlook that there are some signs scattered throughout this story which reveal he is still nostalgic about his past pleasure-seeking, and dissipated days: he still prowls around the Ritz bar, where he led the past days with some alcohol-addicted peers; he gives Alix the bartender a memo on which an address of his brother-in-law’s is scribbled, and asks him to hand it over Duncan Schaeffer, a former friend of his in inebriate days, with an ulterior view to keep in touch and share a drink with the friend later; he wistfully thinks back about the “sort of magic” (Fitzgerald, 208), with which he now figuratively refers to his past dream-like life; after visiting Peters’, he does not go back to his staying hotel directly, but instead calls on the nightclubs and nude revues he frequented in the previous life (Bodine).
In order to show us Charlie’s suspension between the past and present world, not only such aforementioned direct descriptions but also some metaphorical elements does Fitzgerald have scattered in this story in a dextrously unobtrusive manner. In an article ““Babylon Revisited”: A Story of the Exile’s Return”, critic Roy R. Male presents us one intriguing theory showing Charlie “still wants both worlds” (94). In a scene in which Charlie and Horonia take lunch together, he gently suggests to his daughter that she order more vegetables, saying, “Now, how about vegetables? Oughtn’t you to have some vegetables?” (Fitzgerald, 210). From this line, we are given the impression that he is trying to display himself as a morally sophisticated father (Male, 95), and therefore allowed to feel as if he sincerely derived new pleasure in the present life with Horonia. However, our assumption will see itself completely destroyed in a further reading, and we will find he unconsciously discloses to readers that his obsession with the past is not entirely liquidated. Asked where they are going to from now on by Horonia, Charlie answers they will visit a toy store and vaudeville. Horonia approves his suggestion of going to the variety show, but reveals her hostility at there being no hesitation toward squandering money at the toy store in her father (Male, 95). Here, it is especially significant that we can know that on a profound reading level, it is actually Horonia, not Charlie who is really “educating” (Male, 95) the other. In front of his loving daughter, Charlie at first tries to accomplish his present ulterior purpose to be a good father, only to find himself, in the end, failing to do so, caught by a past-days practice of unlimited use of money. Thus he still oscillates between the two worlds ― past and present ―; providing reliable clues for us to judge that his determination to rehabilitate himself is quite thin, and far from steadfast.
The second pendulous element reinforcing the view of superficiality in Charlie’s rehabilitation is can also be seen in the Paris-America dichotomy. Like past and present, Fitzgerald shrewdly displays the contrasted image of Paris and America in this story. What we have to notice is that again Charlie, thoroughly inconsistent with his attitude, vacillates between the two worlds. Here, we can take a look of what kind of symbolism each place has: exhibiting some diabolical and ominous portrayals such as sordid tourist traps and loose women, and also being suggested by the fact that one of the nightclubs’ names on the street is “Cafe of Hell”, no doubt Paris can be said to be the incarnation of a morally destroyed place. On the other hand it is noticeable that the image of America in this story is unmistakably positive, possessing everlasting energy and vitality (Bodine). Actually, it may be possible to say that almost all references to America in this story maintain a positive atmosphere, as is clearly manifested in the phrases like “warm and comfortably American” and “fresh American loveliness” (Fitzgerald, 207). Now, it is of especial importance that we must come to realization that one who really rehabilitates oneself and puts away one’s own problem entirely behind oneself, would not pay any tiny fraction of attention to morally disastrous places. Of course, it is true that Charlie feels fascinated with the “quiet and decent homelife” he wishes to “establish for his child” (Barker, 270). However, we can also know Charlie’s unwittingly clinging to the depraved world of Paris by the fact that he is very impressed by the nocturnal beauty of the city (Barker, 271) ― “He was curious to see Paris by night with clearer and more judicious eyes than those of other days” (Fitzgerald, 208).
The other unique testimony implying Charlie’s ambivalent pendulum in the Paris-America dichotomy is clearly manifested in two female characters in “Babylon Revisited”; through this idea we will be ultimately convinced that to all appearance Charlie is tenaciously obsessed by emotional attachments to both of worlds. Lorraine and Marion, the former a past friend of his in inebriate days, revealing that no tiny feeling to rehabilitate herself still exists at all, and the latter a sister of Helen, Charlie’s dead wife, whom he inadvertently led to death, and therefore having irrevocable hostility toward him. Particularly noteworthy is that we can derive the significance of both the two women in the intriguing theory that they are in fact portrayed as symbolic embodiments of the two worlds (Male, 95).
This argument will earn its validity when we scrutinize their difference in character: Lorraine, who overtly and repeatedly attempts to degenerate Charlie into a past debauched man with every appearance of a woman who is alcoholic frivolity itself, obviously must be regarded as corresponding to the immoral image of Paris; on the other hand Marion, who is sensitively inimical to any tincture of mention concerning alcohol like “bar” (Fitzgerald, 208) due to the trauma of her sister’s death, unmistakably represents her clinging to the harmonious and peaceful life with her tender-hearted home, which is “warm and comfortably American” (Fitzgerald, 207). Plus it must not be overlooked that Charlie is “indebted” to both of them: to Lorraine for hanging around together in previous days; and to Marion for taking care of Horonia (Male, 95). Thus we can find that Charlie, by displaying emotional attachments to both women, is still suspended between the two worlds. Such far from steadfast and strong-minded attitude of his becomes the great indicator of how radically untruthful his character is, and therefore we will be convinced that his determination to obliterate alcoholism in his nature is also untruthful, and just superficial.
To closely analyze the way Charlie is obediently influenced by the force of pendulum leads us to realize the unquestionable fact that he has unforgivable problems in his personality. There are obvious traces discoverable of Charlie’s selfishness and unwillingness to accept reality in the simple fact that he has been gone for a long time (Male, 92). Perhaps this suggests that it is nothing but despicable that one escapes somewhere else with one’s own nasty problems left yet unresolved in order to evade possible bursts of indignation from others; in fact Charlie, who locked his former wife Helen out of his house without knowing it, and therefore made her freeze to death half a year ago, must have wreaked incurable mental damage on Helen’s sister Marion at that time. However, far from showing Marion something sincere and conciliatory for her being incarcerated into the intolerable anguish, Charlie was gone, as though he unrelentingly rejected being confronted with harsh realities because he was sure that any sight of Marion’s lamentation would suffer him with an incessant sense of guilty. In addition to such lack of responsibility, we can see Charlie’s unreliable personality in terms of his insincerity. On the evening when Charlie and Peters’ talk about custody of Horonia, he regards the meeting as “contests or performances” in which ‘’all his behaviour must be manipulated to win’’ (Answers. com) his “point” (Fitzgerald, 214). Plus, in the very meeting Charlie supposes that his successful pretention of “the chastened attitude of the reformed sinner” (Fitzgerald, 214) will eventually let himself to see the favourable result of getting back Horonia (Barker, 272). These opinions tell us that all Charlie’s performance as a radically changed man comes from the disingenuous thought that he has only to endure a number of acrimonious diatribes by Peters’ in the coming few hours ahead, to at last achieve his big ambition unfulfilled for almost two years. Again it must be remembered that revealing Charlie’s failure in his personality largely contributes to our deciding that his rehabilitation of alcohol and goodbye to his orgiastic days is quite suspicious and untruthful. Due to such heinous escapism and hypocrisy in his nature, Charlie is no doubt all the more inconsistent with his attitude from the first to the last, invariably oscillating between two worlds.
So far, we have observed the argument that Charlie’s rehabilitation is only a superficial one in terms of the definite contemptibility in his nature. However, the idea of Charlie’s ostensible nature will be confirmed more clearly when we pay careful attention to not only the protagonists in “Babylon Revisited” but also its author F. Scott Fitzgerald himself. As many critics have pointed out, Charlie is thought to be a character onto which Fitzgerald himself is superimposed. Therefore, we can safely say that proving Fitzgerald’s outrageous alcoholism directly contributes to confirming Charlie’s strong obsession with alcohol, making us convinced that his rehabilitation is nothing but pretence.
Actually, it is well-known that Fitzgerald was incessantly preoccupied with alcohol all his life: without reference to alcoholism, it is impossible to accurately describe his life. It can be said that alcoholism seems to be something inherited from one’s parents. Fitzgerald’s father was also an alcoholic, the Irish drunker; this father, due to the notorious romantic levity particular in the Irish people, is said to have justified his drinking by insisting on the mesmerizing fascination of alcohol, sentimentally saying that there is a “kindness” in intoxication whose attraction is like “the memories of ephemeral and faded evenings” (Donaldson, 158). Perhaps such attitudes of his toward drinking may have had a non-ignorable influence on his son’s obsession with alcohol: parents’ outrageous addiction to something being exhibited noticeably on whom a child’s construction of personality is completely based, he will trace the same path as them, to find himself addicted to it irrevocably. Another reason that Fitzgerald could not stop drinking lies in his sense of insecurity. It is certain he suffered from relentless assaults of guilt in his life; feeling guilty at the misuse of his own talent, at possible contribution to his wife Zelda’s schizophrenia, and at being alcoholic itself (Donaldson, 160), Fitzgerald must have fallen down into a sea of endless anxieties so deeply that he could not help feeling the need to assuage himself. The only way he came up with to mollify his vehement agonies is to derive a sense of peace in drinking (Donaldson, 160) ― it seems as though he wished to escape into another world of imagination produced by alcohol so that he could make sure there was no force to make him faced with inhospitable realities. Probably the identification between Charlie and Fitzgerald is to some extent attributed to their common drawback of escapism.
The idea of Fitzgerald’s alcoholism is brought home to us more potently when we notice he has other stories with the ulterior motif of alcohol. One of his short stories “Crazy Sunday” is a good example. In this story, Joel, a twenty-eight-year-old screenwriter who arrived at Hollywood six months before, is invited to a party at the home of a high-ranked director Miles Calman, which a lot of other major directors are supposed to attend. Aware of his own tendency to drink too much, Joel at first decides not to take anything alcoholic during this party, which is described like this: “He wished Miles would be within hearing when the cocktails were passed to hear his succinct, unobtrusive, ‘No, thank you.’ ” (Fitzgerald, Crazy Sunday, 557). However, this promise is broken within one hour: Joel, blindly fascinated with mesmeric beauty of Stella, Miles’s wife, accepts a cocktail from her, continuing to drink to such an extent that he totally succumbs to the evil force of alcohol. Critic Jennifer Bussey criticizes his behaviour in terms of “immaturity” (Bussey). According to her, Joel’s lack of maturity is detectable in his failure to restrain himself and exercise discipline. One has only to look at the mere fact that at the important party Joel frivolously becomes all the more friendly and overconfident for the power of alcohol, to see his immaturity, because his countless accumulated experiences of drinking should have been enough for him to be aware of his bad behaviour when inebriated (Bussey). Joel’s inadequately appreciating the knowledge about his own self, which a man with a good common sense should have gotten into his bones, is the great indicator of how little he cares about mere sensibility. Thus, due to the lack of judicious awareness of his own self, Joel, like Charlie in “Babylon Revisited”, is also not able to fulfil his determination against being an obedient slave of alcohol.
Now, it is necessary to note Joel is also regarded as a symbolic character that in fact represents Fitzgerald himself. This can be safely said mainly because the fact that Joel performs a short comic act which turns out to be a complete fiasco in front of many major directors is based on Fitzgerald’s real experience (Eble, 45). Thus, in “Crazy Sunday”, it is certain that Fitzgerald insinuates to readers his outrageous obsession with alcohol by portraying the foolish way the incarnated protagonist of his own self named Joel fails to ignore the temptation of drinking even in the most self-controllable situation ― the party of such high importance that his favourable impression as a morally courteous gentleman of soberness might lead to a future connection with some big celebrity in his business world.
Also, there is a very intriguing theory warranting Fitzgerald’s alcoholism in a completely new manner. Donald W. Goodwin, who started his postgraduate career as a literature student at Columbia University, and went on to get a medical degree and to become a psychiatrist, has demonstrated an interesting correlation between writers and alcohol, presenting a curious opinion: writers tend to drink (qtd. in Lehmann-Haupt). In an article “The Alcoholism of F. Scott Fitzgerald”, Dr. Goodwin observes the connection between writing and alcoholism, and analyzes how the two interact with each other as a following:
Writing is a form of exhibitionism; alcohol lowers inhibitions and brings out exhibitionism in many people. Writing requires an interest in people; alcohol increases sociability and makes people more interesting. Writing involves fantasy; alcohol produces fantasy. Writing requires self-confidence; alcohol bolsters self-confidence. Writing is lonely work; alcohol assuages loneliness. Writing requires intense concentration; alcohol relaxes (Goodwin, 90).
Plus, Dr. Goodwin presents this theory of his about the interesting connection between writers and alcohol in his another famous book, “Alcohol and the Writer” too. He tries to elucidate his idea that writers tend to drink in various kinds of aspects; he insists that writers have drunken firstly because “the hours are good”, suggesting that the lack of restriction by hard working hours particular in blue-collar jobs makes it possible for novelists or poets to spend much time in drinking; secondly because “it is expected”, writers’ self-indulgent inebriation justified in the romantic image toward the artist in the world (qtd. in Lehmann-Haupt) while in no other jobs can it be accepted; thirdly because “writers need inspiration”, there being a favorably permeated thought among writers that intoxication by alcohol will spur their creative imagination and make their mind more perspicacious to the world (qtd. in Benedictus).
Dr. Goodwin’s theories above confirming the idea of writers’ particular susceptibility to alcoholism seem very persuasive in convincing us of Fitzgerald’s addiction to alcohol; however, this opinion will make itself clearer and take a lively part as a good reminder of our original thesis of Charlie’s pretence, when our meticulous analysis of the “writing” is carried out. Writing is one of the most demanding works; as is often said, almost intolerably relegated to the margin of mental condition due to the assaulting obsession with the deadline, the lack of congeniality with editors, and so on, writers are sometimes forced to get through the life imprisoned in a completely excluded room which could jeopardize their healthy mind, as an American writer Charles Deemer says “No one cared if I wrote at three in the morning or three in the afternoon” (Deemer). However, although there is no denying that some writers, due to such harsh realities, decide to put a perpetual end to their career as writers, it still remains undeniable that many of them feel an imperishable satisfaction in their work those heartbrokenly vanquished by these worries will never know, being proud of their own work. It is not any amount of pleasurable fan letters or even honorable prizes which so vehemently motivates and encourages them into hard work; but their comfortable knowledge that they can “exhibit” to readers their own opinion and feeling completely at will. In other words, writing is a “spending of one’s resources to gain release from the rigid grip of time, space, and circumstances” (Male, 94).
In the last scene of “Babylon Revisited”, a lot of phantasmagoric memories in past orgiastic days run through Charlie’s head like nightmares ― “the people they had met travelling”, “people who couldn't add a row of figures or speak a coherent sentence”, “the women and girls carried screaming with drink or drugs out of public places” (Fitzgerald, 223). Then Charlie remembers one memorable sight: “the men who locked their wives out in the snow, because the snow of twenty-nine wasn't real snow. If you didn't want it to be snow, you just paid some money” (Fitzgerald, 223). From the very last phrase, we can know that the spenders, by squandering money, carried out a distortion of time and space (Male, 94). Now, it is very significant that we come to the realization that combined with the aforementioned definition of the “writing” that it is a process to exhibit one’s resources to free oneself from restriction of any dimension, the conspicuous display of money by those nasty spenders clearly becomes an ultimate evidence of the identification between Fitzgerald and Charlie ― the two exhibitionisms of writers and spenders, the former representing Fitzgerald and the latter Charlie, correspond with each other in that both of them make it its business to transform and manipulate every dimension totally at will. Thus, to closely analysis what writing is like directly contributes to making more convincing the idea of togetherness between Fitzgerald and Charlie, and therefore the writers’-inclination-to-alcohol theory by Dr. Goodwin comes to us with more validity, indicating that Charlie’s alcoholism is also such an extent that he cannot so easily dispel the emotional attachment to alcohol.
As we have seen so far, there are plenty of convincing elements detectable which show that Charlie’s rehabilitation of alcoholism is nothing but superficial. The more deliberately we savor this story, the more potently his unreliable personality hits us. Constantly detaining him in a sense of disappointment, the indelible affection to alcohol will obstinately provide ruthless realities to Charlie all his life forever, as has done to Marion the extraordinarily anguished trauma of her sister’s death produced by his irresponsibility.
Works Cited
"Babylon Revisited (Themes)" Answers. com. 17 January 2009
Baker, Carlos. “When the Stories Ends: “Babylon Revisited.”” Short Stories Criticism. Ed. Anna J. Sheets. Detroit: Gale Group, 1999. 270-271.
Benedictus, Luke. “Those Literary Lushes.” The age. com. au. 22 January 2009
< http://www.theage.com.au/articles/2002/08/13/1029113928191.html>.
Bodine, Paul. “An Overview of “Babylon Revisited.”” 9 January 2009
< http://ftp.ccccd.edu/mtolleson/2328online/2328notesbabylon.htm>.
Bussey, Jennifer. “Critical Essay on “Crazy Sunday.”” Novelguide. com. 21 January 2009
<http://www.novelguide.com/a/discover/ssfs_0000_0021_0/ssfs_0000_0021_0_00015.html>.
Deemer, Charles. “A Portrait of the Writer as a Drunk.” Liquor and Lit. 16 January 2009
< http://www.ibiblio.org/cdeemer/liqlit.htm>.
Donaldson, Scott. “Demon Drink.” Fool for Love: A Biography of F. Scott Fitzgerald. New York: Delta, 1983. 158-160.
Eble, Kenneth E. “Touches of Disaster: Alcoholism and Mental Illness in Fitzgerald’s Short Stories.” The Short Stories of F. Scott Fitzgerald: New Approaches in Criticism. Madison: University of Wisconsin Press, 1982. 45.
Fitzgerald, F Scott. “Babylon Revisited.” The Collected Short Stories of F. Scott Fitzgerald. London: Penguin Books, 1986. 205-223.
---. “Crazy Sunday.” The Collected Short Stories of F. Scott Fitzgerald. London: Penguin Books, 1986. 556-572.
Goodwin, Donald W. “The Alcoholism of F. Scott Fitzgerald.” Journal of the American Medical Association. 6 Apr. 1970. 90.
Lehmann-Haupt, Christopher. “Books of the Times; Odd Angles on Alcoholism and American Writers.” The New York Times. 7 November 1988. 17 January 2009
<http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=940DE3D61431F934A35752C1A96E948260&sec=&spon=&pagewanted=all>.
Male, Roy R. ““Babylon Revisited”: A Story of the Exile’s Return.” F. Scott Fitzgerald. Ed. Harold Boom. New York: Chelsea House, 1985. 91-95.
Your blog information was very helpful for people and it should give a useful tips to them.
返信削除Web Design Company | Website Design Companies
I really grateful to this blog owner for done a great job by updating this segment of babylon revisitedthe indelible.
返信削除Web Designing Companies Bangalore | Website Development Company Bangalore