I don't want to give this particular element of the story more importance than some of the broader issues of "White Noise," but what would you describe as values in the Gladney household? The parents might borrow porn from their son for a little bedtime foreplay (and for some reason their well-stocked erotica collection from various times, genres and proclivities amused me), but judgment rains down upon Babette over the brand of her chewing gum. Maybe self-worship, self-preservation, self-gratification are the key values of the white noise family life.
If so, does it extend beyond the Gladneys?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
10 comments:
Oh, that's a great question. I always had the impression of a close-knit family on the verge of unraveling. It's like they were principally held together by banter, and yet it's the little not-yet-verbal kid who seems to inspire the most love and awe. I think self-reliance is a kind of value in the household. The kids seem precocious. And being engaged with the world is a value, even if the engagement is more-or-less spectatorish. And not being particularly deferential to authority — that was a value, wasn't it?
Remember how Murray says that "the family process works toward sealing off the world."
"He asks me why the strongest family units exist in the least developed societies... Magic and superstition become entrenched as the powerful orthodoxy of the clan. The family is strongest where objective reality is most likely to be misinterpreted."
I thought that whole discussion had a relevance to the Gladneys and all their smart, funny, misinformed dialogues.
Funny you ask if those (or whatever) values extend beyond the family, because at some point I noticed that the dialogue was very similar from person to person. I mean, they had distinct enough voices, but everyone seemed to share a kind of glib world-weariness that was reflected in their attitudes and banter. Did you notice this?
OK, and let's discuss the scene where, as a family, they savagely gobbled up the chicken in the car!
Good point. The kids are precocious, even peers to the adults. In the same way a police valued a psychic's take on the Treadwell mystery as well as any more credible sources, the narrator seemed to take his children's observations as seriously, if not more so, than any other adults he encounters in the novel. Even when they're blatantly wrong.
You know, the visit from Bea was sort of an perplexing plot point to me until you reiterated what Murray said: "the family process works toward sealing off the world." Though a blood relative, Bea was an intruder and had that strange power and credibility (despite her age) to disturb the family unit. It didn't come down to who was blood kin to whom, it was who had built a role in the tribe.
That reminds me, I was sort of mystified at first trying to sort out whose children were whose. I guess it wasn't important. Initially I thought J.A.K. valued Babette and the children were just afterthoughts, or trophies men have to provide for women, but later the narrator showed that deep sense of love and gentleness you mention.
Dialogue! Yes! I failed to mention that I also thought it was too universally glib. It's distracting when every character generally shares the same voice. Even the pilot during the plane crash scare sounded like everyone else(although, how brilliant: "I love you, Lance," and the passengers have to pause and judge amid their apparent doom).
Fantastic point about Bea. She was like a visiting adult (more adult even than her wacky mom) who went away as quietly and strangely as she came. The family seemed to have a love-the-one-you're-with mentality, but there didn't seem to be a lot of concern/sadness about members who lived outside the tribe — also like Babette's dad and ex-husband. They just kind of wander in and out again, causing a few ripples on the surface. These people are loved and all, but there's always a sense that people are waiting for them to leave.
Wasn't that scene where Gladney discovered his father-in-law sitting out on the lawn incredibly creepy?
and the passengers have to pause and judge amid their apparent doom
Marvelous way to put that.
I had the same feeling about how everyone sounded alike. Even the German nuns talked like everyone else, just with a German accent. The same banter everywhere. It sort of reminded me of "Catch-22" in that way.
Good point about the children being almost peers to their parents. Sometimes it was easy to lose track of who was talking because they were always reversing roles. The children were always giving advice to the parents and scolding the parents for various behaviors.
I was touched by how close the family was, but they were close in an almost unfamilial way, like they were unrelated friends. As you all have mentioned, the children were peers to the adults or perhaps even in reversed roles.
The tone of everyone's speech was very interesting -- as you all have pointed out, it was the same from every character. Yet the characters were distinct, perhaps because what they said was different even though how they said it was the same. Reminiscent of Catch-22, except that the narrator in Catch-22 was different than all the other characters, while this narrator fits right in.
Erin, not only did I sometimes become confused about whether children or parents were speaking, I found that to be even more the case when it was Jack and Murray. The voices weren't distinct enough.
Post a Comment